HERMAS IN ARCADIA

AND OTHER ESSAYS. i£onbon: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE, 6llll5aob!: 263. ARGYLE STREET

JLeipJfg: F. A. BROCKHAUS. f)tebJ l/!orl!: MACMILLAN AND CO. HERMAS IN ARCADIA

AND OTHER ESSAYS

BY

J. RENDEL HARRIS, M.A., D.LITT. (DuBL.),

FELLOW OF CLI.RE COLLEGE, CAJl'.rBRIDOE,

CAMBRIDGE: AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 1896

[All Rights reserved.] C!ramhn'bge:

PRINTED BY J, AND C, F. CLAY,

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, PREF.A.OE.

JN the following pages I have reprinted two essays which throw some light on critical problems connected with the text and interpretation of that famous early Christian book, known as the Shepherd of Hermas. Each of them has been the starting point for important investigations by the leading scholars of our time ; and I have endeavoured to indicate the accretions or corrections which they have made to my first statements, so that the student may not only have before him the texts of my researches, which are extant, sometimes in very brief form, in journals not very easy of access, but may also be able to bring the investigations up to their latest point of development. Of these two essays the first appeared in June 188'7 in the Journal of the Society for Biblical Literature and Exegesis (Boston, U.S.A.); the second is three years earlier in date; it was first printed in the Circulars of the Johns Hopkins University for April 1884, a publication containing many valuable notes on all branches of science, but not generally accessible, nor easy to handle. If the brief paper in question were estimated by the combat of.giants which it provoked, I think it would be admitted that it was worth reprinting. To these I have added a number of other pieces which may, perhaps, be found useful by the critics. Where they do not permanently instruct, they may transitorily please; and where the matter of them may seem to be unimportant, the method will sometimes be found deserving of consideration,

8672 CONTENTS.

PAGES liERMAS IN ARCADIA • 1-20

ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF liERMAS • 21-25

PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY • 26-42

PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL 43-59

EuTHALIUS AND EusEBIUS • 60-83 HERMAS IN ARCADIA.

HE object of the present paper is to set at rest a critical T difficulty which has been raised concerning the interpretation of the tract of Hermas which goes under the heading of the Ninth Similitude; and to indicate a direction in which further light may be obtained on the vexed question of the date of this remarkable writer. The difficulty is in the first instance one of interpretation: we find in the writings of Hermas a blending of the real experi­ ences of life with imaginary importations from current mythologies which render it hard to decide whether the writer wishes us to take him seriously, or to apply to his works an allegorical inter­ pretation such as was common enough in early times, both in pagan and Jewish and Christian circles. And it is probably this perplexity rather than a mere personal fondness for such interpre­ tations which led Origen to explain even the most strongly defined persi:mal allusions in Hermas, the names of Clement and Grapte, in a spiritual manner. We may at least conclude that the subject invited such treatment. We may easily agree that the allusions to his life in Rome in the first Vision are genuine history, from which the step to the second Vision, which contains a visit to Cumre, seems natural, as does also the account of the walk on the Via Campana in the third Vision. But if we admit these passages to be meant for a literal acceptation, we certainly cannot admit the interview with the Church-Sibyl to be anything but a work of imagination based on popular religious mythology. And we should not find it easy to determine where the literal ends and the allegorical begins. We are thus in much the same case as an interpreter of the Pilgrim's Progress would be who had sufficient knowledge of Bunyan's history to see that the "certain den" with which the book opens is the Bedford prison, and who had sufficient aa 1 2 HERM.A.S IN ARCADIA. insight to determine that the rest of the book was allegorical, but who was wanting both in the historical information and in the intuitive perception by which to detect the traces of Bunyan's personal history which lurk behind the folds of the Allegory. It is however generally held that the mention of places not very remote from Rome ought to be accepted as sufficient evidence that the writer is giving us history rather than romance. The Via Campana, at least, scarcely admits of being allegorized, nor the mile-stones which Hermas passes on the road: with Cumre the question is a little more involved, but even here the general opinion has been, and probably will remain in favour of the positive geographical acceptation of Hermas' words. Such being the case, it is not a little surprising that, when we have so many Italian allusions in the book of Visions, we should find ourselves transported in the Ninth Similitude into Arcadia, and there regaled with an allegorical account of the building of the Church, which outdoes in fantastic detail the whole of the previous accounts. Are we to assume that, as in the case quoted from the Pilgrim's Progress, the initial note of place is to be accepted literally, and that from that point we plunge into allegory ; or is the whole a work of imagination from the start 1 In the latter case, how can we explain the change of literary method involved in the comparison between a real Rome, Cumre, Via Campana, and a poetic Arcadia 1 In the former case, how did the Roman Hermas find his way into the most inaccessible part of Greece ? It was no doubt through some such questioning that Zahn was led to propose an emendation in the text of Hermas so that instead of reading Kal a7NJ"fary6v µ,e ek •ApKaUav we should put •ApiK{av for 'Ap"aSlav. The advantage of this correction was that it transferred the scene again to the neighbour­ hood of Rome, and restored the literary parallelism between the Ninth Similitude and the book of Visions. To support this conjecture, Zahn first brought forward a case where the word 'ApiKlav had been corrupted in transcription, viz.: a passage in the Acts of Peter and Paul, c. 20, where the scribe has in error given •Apa/3lav. If Arabia, why not Arcadia? Then he proceeds to shew that the country around Aricia corresponds to the description given by Hermas of Arcadian HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 3 scenery, and, in particular, he identifies the " rounded hill" ( lJpoc; µau'TwiiEc;) to which Hermas was transported, with the Italian Monte Gentile. I do not know whether this suggestion of Zahn has met with any great favour, although it is ingenious, and not outside the bounds of possibility. The objection to it is chiefly that which falls to the lot of the majority of conjectural emenda­ tions, viz.: that it is not necessary; for, as I shall shew presently, the whole description of the country visited by Hermas, corresponds closely with the current accounts of Arcadian scenery, and is probably based upon them. So that if I do not discuss Zahn's hypothesis di.J.-ectly, it is because it is a last resort of criticism to which one must not look until the normal methods of interpretation have broken down. Let us then examine the scene into which Hermas introduces us; and the interpretation which he puts upon what he sees. We are told in the first place that his guide led him away into Arcadia and there seated him upon the top of a rounded hill from whence he had a view of a wide plain surrounded by mountains of diverse character and appearance. We will indicate the description of these mountains by the following diagram, in which the successive eminences are ranged in a circular form, and attached to each is the leading characteristic which is noted by Hermas :-

X £lX£ uxurp.wv 6AOV ly£P,£V f3o-rava<; txapas .. £lxov 8E f3orava.s ai Ka,' 1rav~ y(Vo<;, uxurp.al KTT/VWV Kal opvlwv 8' oXovIll Ep1111.w8£s• .,. X lxov /30Tava-. . • tp1r(Ta 0avaTllf8-r, x>..wpa<; Ka.l Tpax;, DV

0 L £lX£ 8lv8pa p.lyurra x XS' /30Tava., lxov • • • Kal 1rpo/3aTa. .,;p.,t~pov<; , a.Kav0wv KCI.L O(Vopa"'" KaTaKap1ra, LO.x xi Tpt{30AWV 11'AijpfS ..av w,;; ri.u/36},,'Y/ 1-2 4 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. Now before we begin to look for identifications with the scenery of any particular country or neighbourhood, we should try to subtract from the description those details which are artistically inserted by Hennas in order to bring certain views of his own before the minds of his reader under the cover of his allegory. The matter of the Ninth Similitude so far as it concerns the building of the tower and the shaping of the various stones is already present in the third Vision ; and there is much in the description that is parallel to the account given of the various stones which are brought from the twelve mountains. For ex­ ample, just as in the third Vision we find stones brought for building that are wbite, and some that are speckled ( eymp,a1eo-rE,;) ; some that are squared, and some that are round; some that are sound, and some that have cracks in them. When we find, therefore, that in his Ninth Similitude Hennas makes his first mountain black as soot and his twelfth perfectly white, we know that it is more likely to be an expansion of the previous allegory than a natural feature; and when we find him saying that some of the mountains had chasms ( a-xtuµ,at) in them, we must rather refer to the stones that have cracks in them (uxtuµ,ds exovTE<;) than to any peculiarity of the mountain region, however the description may seem to invite the identification with the peculiar characteristic of Arcadia, the teaTtif]a0pa or underground passages and hollows of the mountains into which the rivers of that country so commonly precipitate themselves. A similar process of subtraction must be made on account of the similarity between this Ninth Similitude and the one that precedes it. In this case the allegory turns upon the distribution by the angel of the Lord of a number of branches which he had cut from a great willow-tree. After a while the angel summons the people to whom he had given them and scrutinizes them carefully. Some brought back their branches withered, others half-withered and with cracks on their surface, (-/Jµ,tfl]pov,; 1eai uxiuµt1s exovua,;,) others again were green, (xXmpas,) others had fruit, and so on. A comparison of these terms with those used by Hermas of his mountains will shew that there has been a use made of the Eighth Similitude in the Ninth. Nor must we suppose that there is any special identification with the particular number twelve. The number is introduced artificially and for the following reason: the mountains out of HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 5 which the stones are taken are declared to represent the peoples of the earth out of whom the church is builded ; now the idea prevailed· at an early period that since the Jewish Ecclesia was composed of twelve tribes, something of a similar nature was to be predicated concerning the Christian world which had replaced and comprehended the Jewish world. Otherwise how was an explana­ tion possible of the sealing of the 144,000 in the Apocalypse ? But then these twelve tribes could not be identified with nation­ alities and must therefore represent so many different types of character. This is undoubtedly Hermas' idea, and it shews us that we must not suppose any geographical enumeration to be involved in the number twelve. The author of the Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum amongst his many traces of antiquity gives us the following on Matt. xix. 28 : "Adhuc autem audeo, et subtiliorem introducere sensum, et sententiam alterius cuiusdam viri referre. Exponit autem sic: Quoniam sicut Judaeorum populus in duo­ decim tribus fuit divisus, sic et universus populus Christianus divisus est in duodecim tribus secundum quasdam proprietates animorum et diversitates cordium, quas solus dens discernere et cognoscere potest, ut quaedam animae sunt de tribu Reuben, quaedam de tribu Simeon vel Levi vel Juda." These twelve classes according to Hermas are a. Blasphemers and traitors. (3. Hypocrites and wicked teachers. ,y. Rich men and those who are involved in the business 1 of life • 8. The double-minded. e. Badly-trained, self-willed people. s-. Slanderers and keepers of grudges. t. Simple, guileless, happy souls who give of their toils with­ out hesitating and without reproach. (Of. Teaching of Apostles.) "7· Apostles and teachers. 0. Bad deacons who have plundered the widow and orphan. Lapsi who do not repent and return to the saints.

1 Note that these are said to be 1rP<"fop.ePo, u1ro Tw11 1rptl{ew11 ai!Twv, and correspond to the mountain covered with thorns and briars; the reference to the Gospel (the thorns sprang up and choked them) seems indisputable. 6 HERMAS IN ARCADIA.

i. Hospitable bishops who entertain the servants of God. ux. Martyrs for the Name, including those who thereby obtain a remission that was otherwise inaccessible to them. i/3. Babes of the Kingdom who keep all the commands of God. . ."

1 That Christ was before "the Sun and Moon" is proved by Justin, Dial. 76, apparently from Ps. 72, 17,110. 3. HERMAS IN ARCADIA. '1 able to say that Arcadia was the innermost part of the Pelo­ ponnesus, and that it was shut in on every side by a ring of mountains. The rudest idea that could be formed would there­ fore be that of a plain within a circular mountain-wall ; precisely the kind of view with which the Ninth Similitude opens. Here dwell the remnants of the primitive and virtuous race of men whom the gods loved to visit, whose chief virtues were, according to Polybius, g>tA.OEevla and cf,i)..av0pw7rla. It may be noticed in passing, though I do not attach any importance to it, that Hermas makes one of his spiritual tribes, the good bishops, representative of the virtue of hospitality. But it is plain that Hermas' knowledge goes beyond the elementary notion sketched above. This can be seen best by noticing the points which occur in the description of the moun­ tains which have no special parallel in the allegorical explanation of the characters whom the mountains represent. For example, he adds to his description of his seventh mountain the fact that there were found on it all manner of beasts and birds; the eighth mountain is full of springs; the tenth mountain has sheep resting under the shade of its timber; the ninth is full of snakes and evil beasts ; the eleventh shews fruit trees, and so on. But especially one should draw attention to the sixth mountain, whose description is lxov f30Tt-iva<; xXwpas !(a£ Tpaxv l5v. The same language is used again in c. 22 'TOV lxovTO<; /3oniva<; x)..ropa<; !(a£ Tpaxeo~ ()VTO<;. Here all the editors print the word TpaxJ as an adjective, and it may be so; but if an adjective it is suggested by the name of one of the mountains of Arcadia. A reference to a map of Arcadia will shew this mountain on the eastern side of the plain of Orchomenos : E. Curtius in his Peloponnesos (i. 219) describes it as follows: "Den ostlichen Berg nannten die Alten seiner rauhen und schroffen Form wegen Trachy." I suppose it will hardly be maintained to be an accidental coincidence· that Hermas, writing of Arcadia, or professing to do so, should twice describe a particular mountain by the name which the ancients used to designate one of the mountains of Arcadia. So far from any such assumption being likely, the mere mention of the name Trachy would be sufficient to intimate that we were in Arcadia. This identification being then made, we are able to take the next step, and to determine the plain in which the scene is laid 8 HERMAS IN ARCADIA,

and the rounded hill from which the scenery is viewed. This seems at first sight to be difficult, because, although to an outsider Arcadia might be pictured as a happy valley within mountains, in reality, like Switzerland, with which it has often been compared, it does not furnish any one central plain, but innumerable valleys and small plains; and although there are one or two larger and more spacious than others, none seems to correspond to the rounded form which Hermas' language would at first lead us to expect. But the mention of Mount Trachy shews that the plain must be the plain of Orchomenos, in the midst of which stands, dividing it into upper and lower respectively, the hill of Orchomenos, the strongest natural fortress of Arcadia and perhaps of ancient Greece. This then must be the lfpo<; µ,auTrooE<; of Hermas; it rises to a height of nearly 3000 feet immediately from the plain, and was famous even in Homeric times as one of the early Greek strongholds and cities1• Thus far we might have arrived from a study of the itinerary of Pausanias, from whose description of Arcadia we must make not a few references. Thus in xiii. § 2 we have the following notes: 'OpxoµEvlot<; 0€ ~ wpoTepa 'll"O'J..t<; brl lfpov<; -ryv <'1,,epq Tfj ,eopv

1 Curtius, Peloponnesos, i. 220. "Die orohomenisohe Berg, eine Kuppe von 2912 F. Hohe, welohe Ithome iihnlioh ist, und wie diese zwei Ebenen beherrsoht, steigt unmittelbar aus dem Na.chlande empor." HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 9

rn ...... J µl

MAP ILLUSTRATING HERMAS' VISIT TO ARCADIA 10 HERMAS IN ARCADIA.

Here they said that lEpytus, the son of Elatos, met his death from the bite of a serpent. Of. Pausan. Arcad. iv. 4, K}t,efropt oe T

..ciTov 'TT'Ept­ f!'){,WP'TJUf!V ,lJ 'Ap,caSruv f]arrtAela. T6V 0€ Al7T'VTOV lEeA.0ovra €', &,ypav 0'1}ptwv µ,ev TWV a,;\,C£/J,-0)7Eprov OUOEV, CT1JY Se ov 7rpo'iooµevov , f \ ~\ "A,.. ,., \ , I "tt-, \ » a7T'OIC7'£VVVUt. TOV OE o..,,w TOVTOV /Ca£ aVTO<; 7T'07'E EtoOV' Kara extv euT£, \ Tov\ 1u,cpoTaTov,r Te..,,pq,/,I.. eµ,..,,epTJr;,, ,I._ I r:ni,yµ,au,v I ov' rrvvexerr,l '1T'E'1T'Ot- ,ctA-µ,evor; ICTEo xvi. I, Tpt,cp~vrov oe OU '1T'Oppro tl,}t,).o €(J'TtV lJpor; I,,,'1T'ta ,cat Al'1T'VT

I f11apa- 0pov TO {)Srup ICaTaoexoµ,evov Td €IC..,TOV '1T'e8tov. According to this identification Mt. Skiathis should be the next HERMAS IN ARCADIA, 11 in order to Mt. Sepia, since it is the tenth on Hennas' circle ; and a reference to the map will shew that this conclusion is not contradicted by the geography of the region, except that I think Skiathis would appear a little to the right of Mt. Sepia to an observer on the hill of Orchomenos1• AB to the other character­ istics, it is not worth while to discuss the animal and vegetable products of Arcadia more at length: it is sufficient to say that Hermas' description shews a very fair acquaintance with ancient Greek geography : and we may naturally go on to enquire what were the sources of his knowledge. I think that it will be sufficiently evident from what has gone before that there is at least a suspicion that the description is taken from Pausanias. When we remove from our minds those details which I have shewn to be artificial creations of Hermas, and such generalities as attach themselves naturally to the idea of Arcadia as seen from the outside, we are left with peculiarities that at once fall in with the notes in the Itinerary of Pausanias. And these peculiarities are not the striking features of the Arcadian scenery, such as the lofty Mt. Cyllene 2 and the like, but somewhat insignificant details which would hardly have been noted except by a close observer who was making his own notes carefully as he went along, nor would they have been repeated except by some 8 one who had carefully perused such an itinerary • Now here a difficulty presents itself. No doubt we may admit a certain amount of agreement between Pausanias and Hermas, and it would be strange if two second-century writers, both dealing with the subject of Arcadia, had not expressed themselves in a

1 Note that Curtius says (i. 210), ":3Klalhs ist der schattige Waldberg, gleich .eiq, 7ra'ioa oµwvvµov· o 0€ 'AvTc.>V£VO<; oliTo<; o 0€1.iTEpo<; ,cat, TOU<; TE I'epµdvov,;, µaxtµoJTaTOV<; ,cai. 'lrAEUTTOV<; TWV EV Tfi EvpW'TT'l} /3apf)apc.>v Kai, e0vo,; TO !.avpo- µaTrov, 7r0=µov°' L ,cat' aot,cta<;',:. , apsavrar; " I: Ttµropovµ,evor;' E'1T'Es1J"'' 1:~-..0 e. The language here used has generally been taken to mean that Pausanias was writing his eighth book subsequently to the defeat of the Quadi in 17 4. But it seems to me that while the passage has an air of having brought recent history down to date, that date is the date of the departure of the expedition against the Germans and not of its return. It becomes therefore possible HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 13 to push back the date of the .Arcadia nearly seven years earlier. We proceed on the supposition that Pausanias wrote his history and published it as he went along; this appears from the fact that the eighth book was written at a time when the first book was out of reach of correction. But even, on the earliest hypothesis, does it seem likely that Hermas could have written so late in the second century as to copy Pausanias ? And if this seem too difficult an assumption, especially in view of the Muratorian canon, is there any other hypothesis that will explain the apparent coincidence? The alternative that first offers itself is the depres­ sion of the date of this portion of Hermas. It has been noticed by Hilgenfeld that the writings attributed to Hermas fall, upon critical examination, into three groups: the first of these which Hilgenfeld calls Hermas apocalypticus, com­ prises the first four Visions ; the second part, which comprises Vis. v to Sim. vii, having Vis. iii for its prologue, and Similitude vii for its epilogue, is the true Hermas pastoralis or book of the Shepherd The third division comprises Similitudes viii and ix with the tenth for an epilogue. This part of the book Hilgenfeld calls Hermas secundarius, and attributes to his editorial care (whoever he may be) the massing together of the whole series of writings. Now there is something to be said for this division, even if we may not feel like abandoning altogether the theory of the single authorship. May it not be that the last division is the later workmanship of the same hand as wrote the two former groups ? In that case we are able still to hold to the Muratorian statement with the single restriction that it applies only to the earlier parts of the book. This would require us to assume that Hermas outlived his brother Pius by a number of years, depending, in part, upon the (doubtful) date of the death of Pius, or at least of the close of his episcopate. And even if this explanation be considered. insufficient, it is still possible to adopt Hilgenfeld's theory of a later writer who re-edits and makes an appendix to the earlier Hermas (I do not of course mean to imply that Hilgenfeld makes Hermas fall so late as my theory would imply). And even if Pausanias should turn out not to be the true authority, the identification of the water sources of Corinth brought by Hadrian remains and lowers the date of Hermas accordingly. It becomes proper now to return to the Arcadian allegory and 14 HERMA.S IN ARCADIA. see whether there is any other point where the comparison can be made geographically correct. And I should like, though in a somewhat tentative manner, to suggest that in the details of the building of the tower, Hermas has had some reference to the early Cyclopean buildings of which the ruins were still to be seen in Greece and especially in the Peloponnesus. Perhaps the best way to make my meaning clear will be to compare a passage in Hernias with descriptions taken from Pausanias and modern writers. In Sim. ix. vii. 4, we find Hermas speaking as follows: "I said to the Shepherd, How can these stones which have been condemned enter into the building of the tower ? He answered and said unto me, Dost thou see these stones ? I see them, sir, said I. Said he, I will cut away the greater part of these stones and put them into the building, and they shall fit in with the rest of the stones. How, sir, said I, can these stones when cut occupy the same room ? He answered and said unto me, Those which are found to be small for their place shall be put into the middle of the building, while the larger ones shall be put outside, and so they will hold one another together." Now let us compare with this the description which Pausanias gives of the wonderful Cyclopean walls of Tiryns. He tells us that these walls are made of unwrought stones of such size that a team of mules would not be able to shake even the smallest ones ; and that smaller stones to these are fitted into the interstices of the larger ones, so as to produce the closest union between them 1• I understand Hermas to mean to describe in his builded tower a work of Cyclopean character (which, by the way, appears also from the fact that there are only ten stones in the first course of the building), and the small stones which result from the process of cutting, to correspond to those which Pausanias describes as producing a union between the larger blocks. And it is clear from the description in Hermas that the larger blocks are un­ wrought stones (dprya). Those who wish to see the appearance of such a wall depicted will find it in Schliemann, Mycenw and Tiryns, p. 29, where it is called a "wall of the first period." Similar Cyclopean remains may be found at other points in

l TO Iii) T<.!/Jo1s dva1. Paus. ii. 25, 8. BERM.AS IN ARCADIA. 15 the Peloponnesus, such as the top of the mountain of Orchomenos, and the ruins of the ancient city of Lycosura in Southwest Arcadia. · And this identification helps us to explain a detail in Hermas' account; viz.: the way in which his tower is said to be built over the rock and over the gate (J1ravru -rij~ 1re-rpM ,ca2 e1ravro -r;;~ 71'V"'Jl.'1/~). Special attention is given in these early buildings, such as the acropolis of Mycenre and the like, to the defences of the entrance. The entrance to the gate of the Lions at Mycenre is an illustration of this, the gate being placed at right angles to the wall of the citadel and approached through a passage formed by the citadel wall and a nearly parallel outer wall which formed part of the masonry of a tower by which the entrance was guarded. Schliemann adds to his description of this gateway an approving reference to Leake for pointing out that "the early citadel builders bestowed greater labour than their successors on the approaches to the gates." Another instance of a gate defended by a tower which projects over it is given by Curtius from the ruins of Lycosura : " On the east side of the city there is preserved a gate with a projecting tower ( ein Thor mit einem Thurmvor­ sprunge ).'' I venture the suggestion, then, that Hermas in the Ninth Similitude, when working up again the subject of the Church­ Tower, has been influenced by accounts of the Cyclopean buildings of the Peloponnesus. If his authority was a written one, it may have been Pausanias, as in the previous cases; unless some point can be brought forward to show that Pausanias was unacquainted with what Hermas describes elsewhere, and that Hermas must have had written authority for the same. To sum up the whole course of the preceding arguments: the scene of the Ninth Similitude of Hermas is really laid in Arcadia, probably in the plain of Orchomenos. Some of the mountain scenery which he describes is capable of exact identification by means of the Itinerary of Pausanias ; and he has been influenced in his architecture by the Cyclopean remains of the Peloponnesus. Either the whole or at all events the latter part of the writings of Hermas should therefore be held of later date than the Arcadia of Pausanias. But the objection will be made that recent researches of German investigators and archreologists have shown reason for believing Pausanias himself to be a wholesale thief and plunderer 16 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. of previous guide-books to Greece. So that our investigation may lead rather to the reopening of the Pausanias question than to the solution of the Hermas chronology and geography. The attack upon Pausanias was commenced by Wilamowitz­ Mollendorf (Hermes xii. 72) and sharply reinforced by Hirschfeld in an article in the Archaologische Zeitwng (XL= 1882, f. 97). Hirschfeld brings a good deal of evidence to shew that the list of statues of Olympian victors does not reach later than the second century B.c.; and that the series stops here, not because there were no more Olympian victories commemorated, but because Pausanias is copying an earlier writer (probably Polemo), who does not pass this point of time in his descriptions : so that we may ah.nost say that there is no evidence that Pausanias ever visited Olympia at all ; but that both he and Pliny drew upon earlier writers. Now this problem is a very many-sided one, and the archreo­ logical world is still divided over it, and, until the discussion subsides somewhat, it is not easy to determine whether the defenders of Pausanias or his severe critics have won the day. My own judgment is still reserved upon the point. Hence we must also be careful in reference to Hermas. We may be reason­ ably sure that if Pausanias was never at Olympia, he was never in Arcadia; but the preliminary hypothesis is not yet settled. Hence we content ourselves in the Hermas problem with affirm­ ing that Hermas really describes Arcadian scenery, but whether he takes his description from Pausanias or from some earlier Baedeker's Guide to Arcadia is as yet uncertain. HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 17

After the appearance of the foregoing paper, I received the following remarks upon it from Dr Hort, the characteristic caution of which will be evident to the reader, as I hope it will also be evident presently that the caution was undue and unnecessary.

CAMBRIDGE, 23 Dec. 1887 ...... The first reading interested me much, but not with conviction; for the time, at least, the coincidences seemed t~o slight. The passage from Op. Imperf at p. 73, a book which has much from Origen, is probably founded on some lost passage of him. There is a reference, though in somewhat ambiguous terms in the Comm. in Matt. p. 688 Ru. (1325 A, Migne); cf. 480 (912 A) ..... Dr Lightfoot was more favourable in his view of the argument, but he demurred (as we shall see, rightly) to the assumption that Hermas was indebted to Pausanias. He wrote as follows :

AUCKLAND CASTLE, BISHOP AUCKLAND, Nov. 14, 1887. MY DEAR SIR, I am much obliged to you for your very interesting paper on Hermas in Arcadia. You seem to me to make out a very strong case for Arcadia. As for Pausanias, I am less able to follow you. But you do not insist on this, nor does it affect your main point. If his informa­ tion had been derived from Pausanias, I should have expected to find the resemblances go much further. Yours very sincerely, J. B. DUNELM. At this point the argument was taken up by Mr (now Prof.) Armitage Robinson, who published, in an Appendix to his edition of Lambros' collation of the Athos Codex of the Shepherd of

H. H. 2 18 llERMAS lN ARCADIA. Hennas, some further considerations, which will be found sufficient to dissipate the suspicions aroused by Dr Hort, and to confirm those expressed by Dr Lightfoot. Over and above the identifications which I had suggested between the Arcadian mountains and the scenery described by Hermas, Mr Robinson suggested four further positive identifica­ tions as well as some of a more shadowy character. These are as follows: (i) Mt Knakalus described by Pausanias (viii. 23. 3, 4); ,eva,eor; is the Doric form of ,ev~,eor; a kind of thistle, and conse­ quently this mountain is to be equated with the mountain.which Hermas describes as a,eav0woer; ,eal, Tpi/30).wv 'TT'A~per; (Sim. IX. 1. 5). (ii) A ridge close to Mt Sepia, called TplKp'TJva. 'This no doubt was an abbreviation of TpiKdp'T}va, the three­ peaked ridge; but its popular explanation is all that we have to do with, and that is shewn by the legend that is attached to it : 8p'TJ eveaTwv euTl. Tpl,ep11va ,ca).ovµ,eva · ,eal. elul.v avTo0i 1epijvai Tpe'ir;• ev Tat/Ta£<; ).oiiuai Tex8lvTa 'Epµ,ijv ai m,p'i TO 8por; )./ryovTa£ vvµ,.,.,ai,, ,k ,cai' ew,-, \ TOVTq> / Tar; ' w11,yar;' iepar;t ' CE pµov... voµ,i,.ovuivI~ ,. (Paus. viii. 16. 1 ). Accordingly Mr Robinson identified this with the mountain which Hermas describes as 'TT''T],YWV w).ijper; ... ,cat wav ryevor; Tijr; ICTluew, Toii ,euplou ewoT{tovTo e,e Twv 'TT"TJ,YWV Toii 8pour; eKelvov. The next two identifications are less satisfactory : (iii) A mountain is mentioned by Pausanias, called Phalan­ thus, and since &"A.avOor; is synonymous with a).aKp6, which, like yi).or;, means 'bald,' Mr Robinson proposed to identify this with a mountain which Hermas describes as yi"A.6v, /3oTavar; µ,~ lxov. This seems to me too artificial ; if Hermas had been describing this mountain, it is much more likely that he would have preserved its Greek name, in the same way as he preserved the name of Tpaxv, (iv) The next identification I am almost ashamed to cast a susp1c10n upon. :t\f r Robinson replied to my question as to the omission of Mt Kyllene from the panorama of Hermas, when it must have been the most conspicuous feature in the landscape, by suggesting that Mt Kyllene is the twelfth mountain of Hennas, the great white, glad-faced mountain, 'unreached by HERMAS IN ARCADIA. 19 either cloud or wind, so that the very ashes on the altar of Hermes were found undisturbed whenever the worshippers re-. turned for the annual sacrifice.' There is no doubt that this profound calm of the mountain of Hermes was a favourite thought with the ancients; it has survived for us in modem poetry in the beautiful lines of Wordsworth, where he praises . . . . the perpetual warbling that prevails In Arcady, beneath unaltered skies, Through the long year in constant quiet bound, Night hushed as night, and day serene as day. Excursion, Bk. iii. Unfortunately, however, and this is the only serious objection to the identification, the mountain Kyllene is, as Mr Robin.son knows from an actual visit to the spot, invisible from the hill of Orchomenos; and it seems unlikely that Hermas would have thrust into his panorama a mountain which did not properly form a part of it. He might, perhaps, have done so, if he had been simply working from a geography or a guide-book; but the result of Mr Robinson's additions to my identifications is such as to make it impossible for me to hold any longer the theory of borrowing from Pausanias. Hermas must have been in Arcadia, and _in that case, it is very unlikely that he would have given us an incorrect landscape. I will not say it is impossible, and I should be glad if further consideration should make it appear more probable. But enough has been said to dissipate the suspicions which Dr Hort had expressed to me in private. We take it as proved that the scenery of Hermas' vision is actually laid in Arcadia, and we have not the slightest right to substitute Aricia, or to try to ltalianize the vision. Not only so, but as Mr Robinson has shewn by a number of considerations, the net result of the investigation is to shew that Hermas must have come from Arcadia; his geography is a part of himself and not a loan from Pausanias or some other guide-book. 'May he not,' asks Mr Robinson, 'have been a Greek slave of Arcadian origin ? In this case his name, a common one for Greek slaves, would seem specially fitting for a native of this particular district, when we remember that Pausanias tells us of the worship of Hennas at Pheneos, twelve miles distant from Orchomenus ... , when we remember also the story of the Nymphs who bathed him 2-2 20 HERMAS IN ARCADIA. at his birth in the sacred fountains of Trikrena, one of the spurs 9f Mount Kyllene; and above all when we recall the epithet 'Cyllenius' derived from the worship of Hermas on the windless summit of the great mountain-king of Arcadia, who reared his head, as it was firmly believed, right up into the eternal calm above the clouds and above the storms which darkened and distressed the world at his feet.' The conclusion seems to me to be correct as well as highly eloquent; and I am quite prepared to admit that we have in Hermas a Greek slave from Arcadia. And in this connexion, it is worthy of note that it explains certain features in Hermas' personal history. Arcadian slaves were commonly sold in pairs, and we may get some light on the situation by recalling an instance from the century before Hermas, where two brothers, Arcadian slaves, rose to great eminence in the Roman Empire. The case to which I allude is that of Pallas and Felix, who were sold to Antonia, the mother of the emperor Claudius ; both of them attained their freedom ; Pallas became a leading figure in the life of imperial Rome, and Felix is known to us as the procurator of Judaea who trembled before the preaching of Paul. Now Tacitus tells us (Ann. xii. 53) that Pallas was 'regibus Arcadiae ortus,' no doubt because he was named after one of the Arcadian kings, Pallas the son of Lycaon ; and if this be so, we have an exact parallel to the naming of Hermas after the great deity of Arcadia. But it may be asked, where is the brother of Hermas to complete the parallel ? The answer is in the Mura­ torian Canon which tells us that Hermas is the brother of Pius, who occupied the episcopal chair of the Roman Church. We thus arrive at a picturesque series of parallels between the two pairs of Arcadian brothers, who, in two successive centuries, attained eminence in Roman life ; and while we do not wish to press coincidences which may be accidental, such as the sale of slaves to Roman ladies ( c£ Herm. Vis. i. I o BpJyar; µ,e 'TT'€1rpa,eJv µ,e 'Pooy) and the like, we may at least illustrate by the successful rise from slavery into political eminence of the two freedmen of Claudius, the similar liberation which took place in the case of Hermas and Pius, and which set one of them on the chair of St Peter, and gave the other an even greater place than the chair of Peter, as representative in the Church's literature of one of the most interesting periods in her history. ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS.

(Johns Hopkins University Circulars, April 1884.)

THERE is a passage in the Shepherd of Hermas, Vis. iv. 2, 4, which has occasioned a great deal of perplexity to the com­ mentators. Hermas is met by a fierce beast with a parti-coloured head, which beast symbolizes an impending persecution or tribula­ tion, and makes as though it would devour him. But the Lord sends his angel who is over the wild beasts, whose name is Thegri, and shuts the mouth of the creature, that it may not hurt him. 0erypl according to Gebhardt and Harnack is 'nomen inau­ ditum'; it appears in the Vulgate Latin as Hegrin and in the Palatine version as Tegri. The Ethiopic translation has Tegeri. Jerome seems to have read Tyri, since in his comments on Habac. i. 4 we have 'ex quo liber ille apocryphus stultitiae condemnandus est, in quo scriptum est quemdam angelum nomine Tyri praeesse reptilibus.' Much ingenuity has been expended over the origin of the word and in particular the following is the solution of Franciscus Delitzsch as given in Gebhardt and Harnack's edition: • Si sumi possit, Hermam nomen angeli illius ex angelologia Judaica hausisse, quae angelos maris, pluviae, grandinis etc. finxit iisque noniina commentitia indidit, 0eryp£ idem est quod ''ijr-1 ' . : ., instimulator h. e. angelus, qui bestias (contra homines) instimulat atque, si velit, etiam domat (Taggar = dissidium, discordia; cum i = Tigrl, quod bene descripsit H.: 0erypt etc.).' I assent to the Hebrew origin of the name, but am unwilling to explain a nomen inauditum by a nomen vix auditum. A more simple solution presents itself; if for 0 we write u, according to the confusion common in uncial script, we have °IE,ypl for the 22 ON THE .ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS. name of the angel : which immediately suggests the root ,lO, -T to close. The angel is the one that closes or shuts. This is immediately confirmed by the language of Hermas, o 1e6pw; a1reun:i"Xev TOV d.ryrye"Xov avTOV TdV l1rl T 0 I \ I l.,J. (! \ / , 1111 I'/. f ovoµ,a EU'T'W eryp£, ,ea£ eve't'pa~ev To uToµ,a awov wa /J,"1

At this point the argument was taken up by Dr Hort, in a communication which appeared in the Johns Hophins University ·Circulars for Dec. 1884, as follows: Hermas and Theodotion ; a communication from Professor Hort with regard to an emenda­ tion of the text of Hennas. The note on the Angelology of Hermas printed by Professor Rendel Harris in the Johins Hopkins University Circular for April contains a discovery of considerable interest in itself, and further noteworthy as having at once enabled the discoverer to find a satisfactory answer to an old riddle. There cannot be a doubt that he is right in tracing back the language of Hermas in Vis. iv.

2-4 to Daniel 622 ; and it is hardly less certain, I think, that he has given the true explanation of 6rypi, the mysterious name of the angel who is sent to protect Hermas, by reading it as "ierypt taken as a derivative from sagar, the verb employed in that verse for the shutting of the lions' mouths. The best known repositories of Jewish angelology do not appear to contain the name of Segri: but Sigron q,'iJO) is recorded by Levy-Fleischer (p. 478) from the Talmudic Tract Sanhedrin as an accessory name of Gabriel, given him 'because, if he shuts the doors of heaven, no one can open them.' The designation would seem to belong more naturally in the first instance to some such high function as this than to the shutting of lions' mouths-an office not to be confounded with the general charge of lions or other beasts, said to have been appropriated to different angels;

and the occurrence of Gabriel's name in Dan. 816 ; 921 may easily

have been taken as determining the identity of the angel of 622 • By what <,hannel the Hebrew application of an obscure name belonging to Jewish tradition came to be accepted, though ap­ parently misunderstood, by the Roman Hermas, is a question easier to ask than to answer. My chief purpose, however, in writing this supplementary note, which is sent by Prof. Rendel Harris' request, is to point out that his discovery may have an important bearing on the disputed question of the Shepherd's date. The language of Hennas follows not the true Septuagint version of Daniel, but that of Theodotion, 24 ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HERMAS. which superseded it in the course of the second century. The Septuagint drops the angel altogether: and in v. 22 has merely U£U(J)/C£V µe a 0edr; a'1rd 'TWV Al:OV'T(J)V, while it transfers the shutting of the lions' mouths to v. 18 by the insertion of an interpolated clause ending a7r€/CAl:HJ"€V 'Tit U'TOp,a'Ta TWV A€0V'T{t)V /Ca/, OV 7rap'T}VOXA'TJUav T

This attempt to place the date of Hermas lower than that of Theodotion provoked the opposition of Dr Salmon who, in the following year in a note on Hennas and Theodotion which will be found appended to his Introduction to the New Testament, de­ fended the antiquity of Hermas relatively to Theodotion. Dr Salmon had already in an article on Hermas in Smith's Dictionary of Christian Biography rejected the evidence of the Muratorian Canon which places the time of the composition of the Shepherd in the episcopate of Pius, i.e. c. A.D. 140-155. (The Canon itself must be later than this by some years, and we shall perhaps not be far wrong if we date it approximately in A.D. 180.) Salmon was now obliged to face new and, at first sight, conclusive evidence for the lateness of Hennas. True, the date of Theodotion is not a fixed point, being almost as much in dispute as the date of Hermas. But the evidence of the Patristic literature goes to shew that the Church abandoned the use of the Septuagint Daniel somewhere between the time of Justin and the time of Irenaeus, ON THE ANGELOLOGY OF HER.MAS. 25 substituting for it the more exact version of Theodotion. And certainly the translation made by 'fheodotion is earlier than Irenaeus, · for it is alluded to by the latter writer in his work against Heresies (iii. 21), and there are traces of the use of the Theodotion Daniel in the quotations of Irenaeus from the book itself. It follows, therefore, that Theodotion's text was known in the West as early as 180 .A.D. And if we grant the use of Theodotion by Irenaeus why should we deny it in the case of Hermas? The answer to this, from Dr Salmon's point of view, is that we have no right to assume that the only translations of Daniel current in the early Church were those of the LXX and of Theodotion. An examination of the quotations made from Daniel in the Apocalypse shews some singular agreements with the text of Theodotion as against the LXX, from which it is a natural inference that Theodotion remodelled an earlier version of Daniel. But in that case we have no right to say positively that Hermas has quoted from the text of Theodotion. Even in the very verse which is supposed to furnish the test case, we find a curious agreement with Daniel as quoted in the Epistle to the Hebrews, which suggests the use of a version like the Theodotion version by a writer a century earlier than Theodotion (cf. Heh. xi33 lcf>paEav UToµ,aTa AfOVTCA>II), The argument must be traced at length in Dr Salmon's own pages, and it will, I think, leave the impression upon the mind of the student that a fair case has been made out for a suspense of j udgment in regard to inferences drawn from the Segri passage. Probably it will also be felt that Dr Salmon went too far when he suggested that even the quotations in Irenaeus, which were supposed to come from Theodotion, might be from some lost early version to which that of Theodotion was closely related. If these quotations ~re to be disputed, in the light of the known fact of Irenaeus' acquaintance with the version of Theodotion, we should almost be obliged to go further, and deny the use of Theodotion by Irenaeus' pupil Hippolytus. But this step is too extreme for any one who was not prepared to abolish Theodotion altogether. But without denying the use of Theodotion by Irenaeus we might hold the posteriority of Hermas to be non-proven, and the question then arises as to whether there is any further light to be obtained upon the disputed po1.nts from fresh points of view. PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY.

A Lecture delivered in the Divinity School, Cambridge, in October 1892.

THE newspapers have from time to time during the last two years informed us that the King of Abyssinia has begun to collect books for a Royal Library, and that he has made requisition from the monks of the various monasteries in his kingdom for the leading works which are extant among them, or for copies of the same. One suspects that some traveller is there who has been urging the King to make collections with the view of rendering the recovery of lost Ethiopic books more easy. If that be so, he is a wise traveller and deserves our best thanks. The suggestion, however, of a royal library for Abyssinia takes us back as well as invites us forward; for one of the features of the great kingdom of Prester John, the Christian King of Ethiopia, whom the Portuguese discovered holding the faith in the mountains that border on the southern end of the Red Sea, was a magnificent library. Abyssinia was reported to be a paradise of books, as well as a Christian country with a Happy Valley in it1. And the description which. the English writer Purchas gives of this collection of rare books is enough to make the mouth of every scholar and bibliophile to water. Let me draw your attention, as mine has been drawn by a friend, to the following extract from Purchas his Pilgrimage or Relations of the

1 Rasselas is no mere imagination of Johnson; he wrote the novel shortly after he had been doing the hack-work of translating Lobo's Voyage to .Abyssinia for Bettesworth and Hicks of Paternoster Row, who published it in 1735, Johnson received five guineas for this piece of work and devoted his first earnings to the funeral expenses of his mother. The translation was made from the French edition. PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 2'1 World and the Religions observed in all .Ages, London, 1613; pp. 565 ff., Of the Hill Amara : and the rarities therein. A~er describing the natural features of the hill, the stately buildings of the two churches with their monasteries, he goes on to speak of the library thus (p. 56'7) : " In the monastery of the Holy Crosse are two rare peeces, whereon Wonder may justly fasten both her eies ; the Treasury and Library1 of the Emperour, neither of which is thought to be matchable in the world. That Librarie of Constantinople1 wherein were 120000 bookes, nor the Alexandrian Library, wherein Gellius 3 numbereth '700000, had the fire not been admitted (too hastie a student) to consume them, yet had they come short, if report over-reach not, this whereof we speake, their number is in a maner innumerable, their price inestimable. The Queene of Saba (they say) procured Bookes hither from all parts, besides many which Solomon gave her, and from that time to this, their Emperors have succeeded in like care and diligence. There are three great Halls, each above two hundred paces large, with Bookes of all Sciences, written in fine parchment, with much curiosity of golden letters, and other workes, and cost in the writing, binding, and covers: some on. the floore, some on shelves about the sides; there are few of paper: which is but a new thing in Ethiopia 4• There are the writings of Enoch copied out of the stones wherein they were engraven, which intreate of Philosophie, of the Heavens and Elements. Others goe under the name of Noe, the subject whereof is Cosmographie, Mathematickes, cere­ monies and prayers; some of Abraham which he composed when he dwelt in the valley of Mamre, and there read publikely Philo­ sophie and the Mathematikes. There is very much of Salomon, a great number passing under his name; many ascribed to Job, O which he writ after the recovery of his property ; many of Esdras, the Prophe~s and high Priests. And besides the four canoriicall Gospels, many others ascribed to Bartholomew, Thomas, Andrew, and many others ; much of the Sibylles, in verse and prose ; the

1 "The lilirary of the Prete." [Margin.] 2 " Zonar. Ann. to. S." [Margin.] 3 "Gell. Ii. 6 c. 17." [Margin.] 4 "Fr. Luys bath a very large catalogue of them 1. 1, o. 9 taken out (as he sa.ith) of an Index, wh. Anthony Grious and L. Cremones made of them, being sent hither by the Pope Gregory 13 at the instance of Cardinali Zarlet, whioeh sawe and admired thevarietie of theil:l, as did many others then in their company." [Margin.] 6 Qu. prosperity. 28 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. workes of the Queen of Saba; the Greek Fathers all that have written, of which many are not extant with us; the writers of Syria, Egypt, Africa, and the Latine Fathers translated, with others innumerable in the Greeke, Hebrew, Arabike, Abissine, Egyptian, Syrian, Chaldee, far more authors, and more of them than we have; few in Latin; yet T. Livius is there whole, which with us is imperfect, and some of the works of Thomas Aquinas ; Saint Augustines workes are in Arabike: Poets, Philosophers, Phy­ sicians, Rabbines, Talmudists, Cabalistes, Hierogliphikes, and others would be too tedious to relate. When Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus; when the Saracens over-ranne the Christian world ; many books were conveyed out of the Eastern partes into Ethiopia; when Ferdinand and Isabella expelled the Jewes out of Spaine, many of them entered Ethiopia and for doing this without licence, enriched the Pretes library with their Bookes; when Charles V restored Muleasses to his kingdom, the Prete hearing that there was at Tunis a great Library sent and bought more than 3000 books of divers arts. There are about 200 monks whose office it is to looke to the Librarie, to keep them cleane and sound ; each appointed to the Books of that language which he understandeth ; the Abbot bath streight charge from the Emperor, to have care thereof, he esteeming this Library more than his treasure." The foregoing statements of Purchas are astonishing enough, and it may well be supposed that the range of the literature declared to be extant in the library of Prester John would be sufficient, of itself, to destroy all faith in the authority of the narrator: and indeed this seems to have been the impression produced upon the minds of many scholars of the day, who, while they were not unwilling to believe that lost books might be recovered from Abyssinian libraries, not unnaturally shrank from the belief that all the lost works of ancient Christian literature, to say nothing of pagan letters, were to be found under a single roof in the library of Rasselas. But we must admit that the statements made by Purchas have an air of verisimilitude to a modern scholar. Take the very first statement made by the Elizabethan writer, that the books are all on vellum, and that paper is a new thing in Ethiopia. Does that look like an invention? Take Wright's Catalogue of the Ethil1pic MSS. in the British Museum : and examine whether there are any paper MSS. You will find that they are sur- PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY, 29 prisingly few, and of those which exist almost all are of a more recent date than Purchas' Pilgrims: e.g. No. 12'7 is written in the xviiith century; No. 151 is dated 1630; No. 318 was written in the xixth century ; No. 35'7 was written about the beginning of the xixth century; No. 392 was written in A.D. 1861; No. 395 was written in 1810 (and the paper is dated 180'7), and so on. In fact I have not noted any copy in the British Museum on paper which was not written later than Purchas' day. Is not this remarkable? How did Purchas' informant know that things were so different in Abyssinia to what they were in Syria, for example? In the next place notice that the first of the books referred to by Purchas as extant in the Abyssinian Library is "the writings of Enoch, copied out of the stones on which they were engraven, which intreate of Philosophie, of the Heavens and Elements." Is it not strange that the front rank should have been assigned to the very book which was actually brought back a century and a half later from Abyssinia by the traveller Bruce? Further the reference to the heavenly tablets is in agreement with the language of the book of Enoch ; for example, compare c. 81 " and he said unto me, 0 Enoch, observe the writing of the heavenly tablets, and read what is written thereon and mark every indi­ vidual fact. And I observed everything on the heavenly tablets, and read everything which was written thereon and understood everything.'' Compare with it the manner in which the book of Enoch is cited in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs: "and now, 0 my sons, I have read in the tablets of heaven." Last of all the description which Purchas gives is not a bad summary of the contents of the lost book. The most recent editor of Enoch (Mr Charles) describes a certain section of the book as a Book of Celestial Physics, which is not unlike Purchas' language concerning the Heavens and the Elements. For example, the 62nd chapter entitles itself "The Book of the courses of the luminaries of the heaven and the relations ·of each, according to their classes &c." It must, I think, be admitted that Purchas' account of the book of Enoch is not inconsistent with the belief that he derived his knowledge from some one who had seen the book. A little lower down in the list we are told that the library contained the works of the Queen of Saba. Now this, at all 30 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. events, could hardly have been derived from notices of the earlier Greek and Latin literature. The Queen of Sheba, however, is one of the stock figures in Abyssinian History ; for instance in the book called Kebra Nagast (the Glory of Kings) fourteen chapters 1 are devoted to the legends concerning the Queen of Sheba • Further the Abyssinian literature contains amongst the laws and statutes of the kingdom, a collection brought from Jerusalem by Menelek the son of Solomon. Menelek's mother is the Queen of Sheba. Now we can hardly regard it as a pure accident that Purchas has thrust the Queen of Sheba in amongst the ecclesiastical authors known in Abyssinia; he must have had some knowledge or tradition at the very least with regard to the historical and literary position assigned to the elect lady in question by the Abyssinians. It becomes proper for us, therefore, to investigate as far as possible the sources from which Purchas drew his wonderful account of the Ethiopian literature. Now, as will be seen from our quotation, Purchas gives a marginal reference which betrays his authority: he tells us that "Fr. Luys bath a very large catalogue of them (the Abyssinian treasures) taken out, as he saith, of an Index, which Anthony Gricus and L. Cremones made of them, being sent hither by the Pope Gregory 13 at the instance of Cardinall Zarlet, which sawe and admired the varietie of them, as did many others then in their company." Cardinal Zarlet is, of course, the famous Sirletus, Librarian of the Vatican, and just the very man to have instituted a literary hunt in connexion with the Apostolic missions to the Ethiopes. But who is Fr. Luys, that tells the tale? Amongst the historians who have written of Ethiopia in modern times, we find the name of Luys de Urreta. His work 'Historia de la Etiopia' was published at Valencia in the year 1610, just three years before the first edition of Purchas. In those days Englishmen travelled in Spain and talked Spanish and read Spanish. One has only to recall the allusions in Shakespeare to Spanish customs and the borrowing of Spanish words in a manner which would be unintelligible now-a-days

1 These chapters were edited by Pretorius in 1870 under the title 'Fabula de Regina Saba.ea apud .Ethiopes.' PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 31 and to compare similar phenomena in Ben Jonson and other Elizabethan writers, in order to assure oneself that in the golden age of English literature learned men were familiar with Spanish 1. There is then no difficulty a priori in the use of a Spanish author by Purchas, two or three years after the date of production of his work. But we need not speculate, for we have only to read Purchas side by side with Fr. Luys de Urreta in order to see that practically everything in the one is translated from the other. The very description of the Monasteries, and their location on the sacred mountain of Amara, comes out of Urreta, and so does the whole account of the library and its contents. In proof of these statements we transcribe some sentences of Urreta, and. reproduce his account of the Library, from which it will be seen that it is indeed, as Purchas described it, a very large catalogue, too large apparently for the faith of Purchas, and his was no slight faith, to judge from the number of lost books which he advertised out of Urreta. In lib. i. c. 9 Urreta tells us all about Prester John's library under the heading De los dos Monasterios que ay nel Monte Amara, y la famosa libreria que tiene en uno de ellos el Preste Juan.... Estas dos Iglesias que la una se intitula del Espiritu Santo, y la otra de Santa Cruz, son las mas sumptuosas y magnificas q ay en toda la Etiopia. He then gives a sketch of the most famous libraries in the world, from Aulus Gellius, Epiphanius, Plutarch, Galen, Nicephorus and Zonaras. Two of his references, viz. to Zonaras and Gellius will be found on the margin of Purchas. He goes on to describe the buildings : Son tres salas grandissimas, cada wna de mas de dozientos passos de largo, donde ay libros de todas scientias, todos en pergamino muy sutiles, delgados y brufiidos, con mucha curiosidad de lettras doradas y otras labores y lindezas ; unos enquadernados ricamente, con sus tablas; otros estan sueltos, como processos, rollados y metidos dentro de unas bolsas y talegas de tafetan: de papel ay muy pocos, yes cosa rnoderna y muy nueva entra los de Etiopia. The passages which I have printed in italics shew the source from which Purchas derived his information about the size of the

1 Of. George Herbert's playful allusion : " It cannot sing or play the lute, lt never was in France or Spain." 32 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. three separate halls, and the predominance of vellum books over paper, and the whole of his statements may be further compared with Urreta. Next comes the Catalogue made for Gregory XIII. El aranzel que se traxo al Sumo Pontifice Gregorio deci­ motercio, es el siguiente, Hay escrituras de Enoch, q fue el septimo nieto de Adam, las quales esta en pergaminos, fa<;adas de piedras y ladrillos donde se escriuieron primeramente, que tratan de cosas de Philosophia, de cielos y elementos. Hay otros libros q van co nombre de Noe, que trata de Cosmographia, y Mate­ maticas d cosas naturales y de algunas oraciones y ceremonias. Hay libros de Abraham, los que el compuso quando estuuo en el valle de Mambre, donde tenia discipulos y leya publicamente Philosophia y las Mathematicas ; estos discipulos fueron con cuya ayuda vencio a los quatro Reyes que lleuauan preso a su sobrino Loth. De Salomon muchissimos, unos traydos por la Reyna Saba, otros por Melilec hijo de Salomon, y otros q el mismo Rey Salomon embiaua, y assi son en grande numero los que van con titulo de Salomon. Hay muchos libros con titulo de Job, y dizen que el los compuso despues que boluio en su antigua prosperidad. So far we can see that Purchas has taken practically every­ thing in Urreta. But it will be noticed that Urreta is not destitute of information which could not have been obtained except from people conversant with Ethiopian life. The allusion to Melilec the son of Solomon agrees closely with what we have noted above from the Kebra Nagast or book of the Glory of Kings. Urreta continues as follows ; and we shall see that Purchas is with him for a part of the account: Hay muchos libros de Esdras, y de muchos Prophetas y Sumos Sacerdotes. Muchas epistolas extraordinarias de San Pablo 1, de las quales no se tiene en la Europa noticia. Mucbos Evangelios fuera de los quatro Canonicos y Sagrados, que son san Matheo, san Lucas, san Marcos, y san Juan, como el Evangelio sec-undum Hebraeos, secundum N azaraeos, Encratitas, Ebionitas, y Egipcios; y Evangelio secundum Bartholomaeum, A ndream, S. Thomam, y otros. · Compare this with Purchas' account, and you will see that the English transcriber has begun to abbreviate. Urreta's account grows more and more wonderful.

1 The italicized authors are either those mentioned above by Purchas, or they are names to which we shall refer a little later on. See note on p. 40. PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 33 Aunque es verdad que todos estos Evangelios y libros nombra­ dos sean apocriphos, de muy poca, o ninguna autoridad, con todo los pongo aqui por curiosidad que por tal los guardan en esta libreria, que tambien los tienen por apocriphos en toda la Etiopia; solo los guardan por grandeza, y lo es sin duda para una libreria. Hay muchos libros de las Sybillas en verso y en prosa, y otros compuestos por la reyna Saba y Melilec. By this time Purchas had got as much as he could carry, and he summarizes what remains in Urreta, by telling us that all the Greek and Latin fathers, and all the Philosophers, Physicians and Rabbis are there. Urreta's account proceeds as follows: Historias de la vida y muerte de J esu Christo, y otras cosas que sucedieron despues de su muerte, compuestas por algunos Judios de aquellos tiempos. Hay tambien muchos libros de Abdias1, San Dionysio, fuera de los que por Europa tienen de Origines, y de su maestro Clemente Alexandrino, y el maestro de este Panteno, de todos estos ay muchas obras; de solo Origines ay mas de dozientos libros. Tertulliano, san Basilio, san Cypriano, san Cyrillo, san Hilario, san Hilarion, san Anastasio, san Gregorio Niceno, y N azianzeno, Epiphanio Damaceno, y todos los Dotores Griegos, sin que aya ninguno de los que han escrito que no este en esta libreria: no solo los que comunmente andan entra las manos, pero otros muy esquisitos que no se tiene de ellos noticia, copuestos per los mismos Dotores. De San Ephrem Siro, Moyses Bar cepha, y de otros de la Iglesia Syra. Muchos tomos de San Juan Chrisostomo, y de su maestro Diodoro Tarcese todas sus 2 obras. Oecumenio, Doroteo, Tyro , y Dionysio Alexandrino disci­ pulo de Origines. Serapion en muchos libros, San Justino Martyr muchas obras, con las de su discipulo Taciano; todos los Theo­ doros, el Antiocheno, el Heracleyta, y el Syro, o Teodorito por otro nombre, en compaiiia de Theodolo; los dos Zacharias, el Obispo de Hierocesarea, y el de Chrisopolis, Triphon discipulo de Origines; y Tito Bostrense Arabio. 'l'ambien estan las obras de Ticonio y Arnobio, Theophilato Antiocheno : las obras de Theo­ gnosto alabado por San Athanasio, y Theodoto Ancirano, Acacio discipulo de Eusebio Cesariense, San Alberto Carmelita, Alex­ andro de Capadocia; las obras de Ammonio Alexandrino maestro de Origines, y las de Amphilochio de Iconio, que tuuo la ciencia

1 Cp. lib. ii. c. 14 "Abdias in vita Apostolorum." 2 I follow the punctuation of the MS.

H. H. 3 34 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. reuelada; Anastasio Sinayta, y el Anastasio Antiocheno, y Andreas el Cretense, y Hierosolimitano, y.el Cesariense, Antiocho Monacho, y Antiocho Ptolemaydo, Antipater Bostrense; los dos Apollinares, el Junior y el Antiquior; y tambicn los dos Aristobolos, el mo90 y el viejo, y Aretas Cesariense, Rodon discipulo de Taciano, Rodul­ pho Agricpla, Ga.yo Mario, Victorino, Catina, Syro, por su nombre Lepos, esto es, agudo, ingenioso ; Proclo Constantinopolitano, Primacio Uticense discipulo de San Augustin, Policronio discipulo de Diodoro, Phocion, y Pierio Alexandrino, Philon Judio, del qual ay mas de trezientos libros, cosa que admiro. Y: los J udios de Egipto, de Arabia, y otras partes se obliga a dar muchos millares de ducados, solo por que se las dexen trasladar. Pedro Edesino discipulo de San Efren, Paulo Emesino, y Patrophilo Palestino, Pantaleon; de san Didimo Alexandrino ay muchos libros, y tambien son muchos los de Egesippo: Oresieso Etiope Monge, que vivio ano 420; y las obras de Olimpiodoro y de san Nilo y muchas de N epote Egipcio : Euagrio Antiocheno, y las obras de Eudoxia Emperatriz muger de Theodosio el menor; Euthalion Monge, Basilio, Eustachio Antiocheno, y Euthimio y san Metho­ dio, las obras de Melito Sardense, y de San Luciano Antiocheno, y de Flauiano Constantinopolitano, y Fortwnaciano Africano, y el glorioso Fulgencio, Junilio, y Julio, todos Africanos; los libros de Judas Byro, Isidoro Pelusiota en Egipto, discipulo de San Chriso­ stomo, Isidoro Thesalonicense; estan !as obras de George Trape­ zuncio, y de Gennadio Constantinopolitano; los dos Josephos, San Juan Climaco, y Cassiano, Hisichio Hierosolimitano; de San Augustin ay inumerables obras, no solo las que comunmente andan por las librerias, sin otros muchos libros que nunca se han impresso: de San Hieronymo, San Ambrosio, San Leon Papa, y San Gregorio Magno ay algunos libros, aunque muy pocos, porque de los Dotores Latinos es lo menos que ay. Y aduiertase, que todos los libros que ay en estas tres salas son en lingua Griega, Arabiga, Egipcia, Sim, Chaldea, Hebrea, y Abissina: en lingua Latina no auia ningun libro, sino todas las Decadas de Titoliuio, que por la Europa no se tenian, y alla estauan oluidadas, que como no las sabian leer, no hazian caso de ellas. Lo que digo de los libros de Dotores Latinos, estauan traduzidos en lengua Griega, como San Hieronymo, Ambrosio, San Augustin en lingua Arabiga. De los Dotores mas modernos ay algunos, como las partes de Santo Thomas, y el Contra Gentes: las Obras de San Antonino, y PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 35 el directorio Inquisitorum, traduzidas en lingua Abissina por Pedro Abbas Abissin, natural de Etiopia, hombre doctissimo en lenguas y Theologia Escolastica, traduxo muchas sumas de casos de conciencia, y cada dia se van traduziendo obras de Latin, Italiano, Espanol en el collegio de los Indianos en Roma, para embiar a la Etiopia ; y al presente se estan traduziendo en lengua Etiopia las obras deuotas de Fray Luys de Granada. Estan sobra la Sagrada Escritura todas las translaciones de Origenes, Luciano, Theodosion, Simacho, Aquila; liciones Griegas, Arabigas, Egipcias, Hebreas, Chaldeas, Abissinas, en Armenio, y en Persa, tambien esta la 1 Latina; pero la Vulgata que se cita, y lee, es la Chaldea • De Astrologia, Matematicas, Medicina, Philosophia, son innumerabiles los libros que ay escritos en las linguas dichas, Platon, Aristoteles, Pitagoras, Zenon ; de Archimedes, Auicena, Galeno, Hipocrates, Auerroes, muchos libros, no solo los que comunmente se platican, sino otros muchos, de los quales no se tiene por aca noticia. Libros de Poetas com0 Romero, Pindaro, innumerabiles. De historias ay gran numero. Basta dezir que los libros que ay son mas de un million. De Rabinos assi antes de la venida de Christo, como despues de su santissima muerte, ay mucbissimos ; como de Rabi Dauid Kimki, Rabi Moyses Aegyptius, Moyses Hadarsam, Sahadias, Bengion, Rabi Salomon, Simeon Benjochay, Simeon Benjoachim, Rabi Abraham, Benesra, Bacaiay, Chischia, Abraham Parizol, Abraham Saua, Rab. Achaigool, Rabi Ammay, Rab. Baruchias, Rab. Isaac, Ben Scola, Isaac Karo, Isaac Nathan, Rab. Ismael, Rab. Leui Bengerson, Rab. Pacieta, y otros muchos. De la Cabala, y del Talmud de los Judios auia en un aposento mas de cinco roil tomos. Esta tabla que he puesto en este capitulo es parte de un indice y aranzel que hizo de todos ellos Antonio Greco, y Lorenc;o Cremones, embiados por el Papa Gregorio decimotercio, a instancia del Cardinal Zarleto: los quales fueron a la Etiopia solo para reconocer la libreria, en compafiia de otros que eran embiados para lo proprio, y vinieron admirados de ver tantos libros, que en su vida vieron tantos juntos, y todos de mano y en pergamino, y todos muy grandes, porque son como libros de coro, con el pergamino entero, con los estantes de Cedro muy curioso, y en tan diferentes linguas.

1 That is the Ethiopic : cf. letter of Gonzalez Roderico to the Jesuits in Goa, quoted in Purchas lib. vii. c. 8 "I had made my book in Portuguese and it was necessary to turn it into Chaldee." It is also so named in the Psalterium in qua­ tuor lingu-is of 1518. 3-2 36 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. Urreta goes on, after this tremendous catalogue, to tell us how all these books got to Abyssinia, beginning with the Queen of Sheba, and working down through various historical persecutions and falls of great cities with subsequent removals of collections of books and the like. Now what are we to say to all this story ? Is there anything in it and how much ? We have noticed already that the suspicions awakened in favour of the genuineness of Purchas' story are not reduced to nothing by reading the accounts of Urreta. There are some things brought to light which betray an actual knowledge of Abyssinia. He tells us, moreover, what, as a member of the Dominican order he ought to know, and which is probably quite correct, that the Roman missionaries were translating various books of doctrine and discipline into Ethiopic, such as the works of Aquinas or S. Luys de Granada. And he says that his lists are taken from cata­ logues made at the instigation of Sirletus. All of this looks reasonable enough, if it were not for the colossal size of the library and its wonderful inclusiveness. What are we to say to it ? We know what was said by contemporary writers. Urreta's account was challenged by Godignus in his book De Abassinorum rebus, published at Lyons in 1615. Godignus says (lib. i. cap. xvii.) "Ait in monte Amara, in coenobio sanctae crucis earn (bibliotecam) servari, et ab Regina Sabae accepisse initium, repositos ibi esse libros permultos, quos et tune Salomon ipsi reginae ab Hierosolymis in patriam discedenti dono dedit : et singulis deinde annis solitus erat ad eandem mittere. Inter reliquos esse quosdam, quos vetustissimus ille Enochus ab Adamo septimus de coelo de elementis etc .... Haec de monstruosa illa biblioteca dixisse satis. Reliqua apud eum videat, qui volet. Duo tamen hie adjungenda quae addit. Unum est, Sirleti Cardinalis rogatu, fuisse a Gregorio xiii Pontifice maximo in Ethiopiam missos Antonium Gricum et Laurentium Cremonensem, ut bane inspicerent bibliotecam etc.... Haec ille. Sed nullam in monte Amara esse bibliotecam, ex litteris habemus, et narratione eorum, qui loca illa diu coluere. N onnihil librorum est in eo coenobio, quod Axumum vel Acax­ umum dicitur, et a regina Candace ferunt aedifi.catum in urbe Saba, quae nunc paene euersa, et aequata solo nonnulla retinet antiquae signa pulchritudinis. Quidquid id tamen librorum est, regiae bibliotecae non meretur nomen. PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 3'7 Ita referunt, qui rem perpexere, indubitatae homines fidei." It may perhaps be thought that Godignus was a little too sweeping in his condemnations; no doubt the Jesuit fathers were not disposed to regard with much confidence the statements of the Friars Preachers with regard to Abyssinia or any other matter. Godignus' contemptuous rejection of Urreta was taken up by Ludolf in his History of Ethiopia, published not long after. I quote the second English edition, which bears the date 1684. Ludolf says: "Besides sacred books the Habessines have but very few others. For the story of Barratti 1, who chatters of a library containing ten thousand volumes, 'tis altogether vain and frivolous. Some few we had an account of," and he appends the following note : "Urreta did not think worth while to tell so modest an untruth. The most celebrated Libraries, saith he, that ever had renown were nothing in respect of Presbyter John's: the books are without number, richly and artificially bound; many to which Solomon's and the Patriarchs' names are affixt. Godignus explodes him, 1. i. c. 17." Quetif, the literary historian of the Dominicans, in giving an account of the works of Fr. Luys de Urreta, endeavours to apologize for a description of Abyssinia which he has not courage to defend by suggesting that Urreta was imposed upon by some Ethiopian. He had no intention himself to utter anything that was not truth, but some one played off on him a literary forgery. "De quibus operibus (sc. Urretae) eruditi alii aliter sentiunt, nos hoe unum contendimus Urretam ab implanatorum falsario­ rumve crimine immunem esse, nee· quid quod verum ipse non putaret edidisse: utrum autem cujusdam .A.ethiopis agyrtae Joannis Baltazar2 fraudibus illectus et circumventus fuerit, facilio­ risque fidei hominem se praestiterit, ac levioris, id peritorum certe cordat?rumque relinquimus arbitrio et criterio."

1 John Nunez Barreti (a Portuguese of the city of Oporto) was appointed Patriarch of Ethiopia by the influence of King John of Portugal and at the instance of Peter the Abyssinian : his life will be found in the second book of Godignus, De A.bassinorum rebus : cf. Purchas, P.ilgrims, lib, vii. c. 8. ~ This John Balthazar Abassinus is alluded to in Godignus lib. ii. o. 18, p, 315. Purohas lib. vii. c. 8 (ed. 1625) speaks of him and his connexion with Urreta in the following decided manner: "One Juan de Baltasar, a pretended Abassine, and Knight of the Militarie Order of Saint Antonie, hath written a Booke in Spanish of that Order, founded (as he saith) by the Prete John, in the daies of Saint Basil, with 38 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY.

But this appeal for mercy leaves us still without an ex­ planation of the way in which the fraud, if it was indeed a fraud, was concocted by the hypothetical Ethiopian. It certainly was no ordinary person that manufactured the catalogue in the first instance. To take a single specimen, we are told that the library contained an account of the events occurring in connexion with the Passion, and subsequently; this evidently means the Gospel of Nicodemus, but the writer goes on to say that it was an account written by the Jews: this arises out of the false prologue to the Nicodemus Gospel which affirms the Hebrew origin of the legends. But the reference implies a writer who had also read carefully the books which be describes. Would an Ethiopic trickster have done it so cleverly as this ? Why may not the Acts of Pilate have been extant in Abyssinia? We will now try to take the enquiry a little further, by pointing out the actual source from which Urreta's lists are derived. It has occurred to me that perhaps the details may be extracted from the Biblioteca of Sixtus Senensis : and I now propose to shew that this is really the case. The supposition is not an unlikely one, for Sixtus is the great scholar of the Dominican order; moreover, there is on the margin of Urreta's book, in one place, a reference to Sixtus. He is describing the works of the Patriarchs who wrote before the Flood, and on the margin are the words Escrituras hechas antea del diluvio Sixto Senense lib 4. Bibliothecae. Our main reason for making this suggestion lies in the fact that Urreta's list has every appearance of being taken from an alphabetically arranged catalogue. For example, we have such conjunctions as : Tatian: Theodorus Ant. : Theodorus Heracl.: Theodorus Syrus : Theodoritus : Theodoulos : rules received from him, above seven hundred yeares before any Military Order was in the world. I know not whether his Booke (which I have by me) hath more lies or lines; a man of a leaden braine and a brazen face ; seconded, if not exceeded by the Morall, Naturall and Politicall Historie of Ethiopia, the worke of his Scholler Luys d'Urreta, a Spanish Frier and Iyer: the said Godignus every where through his first Booke confutes him." I have examined Baltazar's book, published at Valencia in 1609, entitled Fundacion, Vida y Regla de la grande orden militar, and do not see any reason to make him responsible for Urreta in the matter of the Catalogue. PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 39 and then after inserting Zacharias of Hierocesarea and Zacharias of Chrysopolis, we go on with Tryphon, Titus of Bostra, and Ticonius and so on. The list then inserts Arnobius, and returns to the end of the alphabet with Theophylact, and Theognostus. There is a method in this madness; it is not necessary to spend time in making illustrations of it. Where is the catalogue from which this was taken? Either the books in the library of Prester John were arranged alphabetically, and followed a Western alphabet, or we have here a Western book catalogue from which selections have been made. That the latter is the solution appears at once on consulting Sixtus Senensis. Let us take one or two extracts from Urreta, and put side by side with them the corresponding parts of the alphabetically arranged catalogue of Sixtus.

Urreta Si:ctus Triphon discipulo de Origenes y Titus Bostrenae ecclesiae in Ara- Tito Bostrense Arabio. Tambien estan bia episcopus. las obras de Ticonio. Triphon, Origenis discipulus. Tichonius, natione Afer. Acacio, discipulo de Eusebio Cesa­ Acacius ... Caesariensis Ecclesiae riense, San Alberto Carmelita, Alex­ Palestinae episcopus, Eusebii Caesa,­ andro de Capadocia. riensis Episcopi discipulus. Albertus Joannis Harlemensis Carmelita.... Alexander, Episcopus Cappado­ ciae. (The intrusion of the modern writer between the two Church .Fathers is very striking.) Rodon discipulo de Taciano, Rhodon Asianus, Tatiani in scrip­ Rodulpho Agricola, turis auditor et discipulus, followed by Rodolphus Agricola, Frisius. Cayo Mario, Victorino, Caius Marius Victorinus Afer, rhetor sui temporis praestantissimus. And a little later on, Catina Syro, por su nombre Lepos, Catina Syrus, cognomine Leptos, esto es, agudo, ingenioso. id est, acutus et ingeniosus ... Cuius meminit Hieronymus libro i. comm. in Ezech., referens summatim exposi­ tionem illius super visione rotarum et miimalium, 40 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY.

Or compare the following: Oresieso Etiope Monge, que vivio Oresiesis monachus et eremita, afio 420 y las obras de Olimpiodoro. Pachomii et Theodori monachorum in solitudinibus lEgypti commoran­ tium collega .. ,Claruit sub Honorio Aug. anno Dom. 420 .... Olympiodorus Monachus. But we need not occupy more space in proving what is abundantly clear that the list of U1Teta is a series of extracts from Sixtus Senensis, and that he follows his authority even in printers' errors 1. We can hardly interpose another writer between Urreta and Sixt.us, and the idea that the catalogue was the fabrication of an Ethiopian monk seems especially improbable. The only question that remains is whether Urreta has drawn upon the narratives of the Dominican missionaries as well as upon the printed work to which we have tracked him. This is not at all an unlikely supposition, and deserves looking into. But we must first subtract all the information that can fairly be set down to Sixtus: and when this is done, there is very little left. All the lost Gospels are gone, Livy is gone, Abraham, and Noah and

1 The following further coincidences may be noted with passages which we have italicized in Urreta 's account. Tryphon, Origenis disoipulus, preceded by Titus Bostrenae ecclesiae in Arabia episcopus. and a little earlier Tichonius, natione Afer. Primasius, Uticensis in Africa episcopus, divi Augnstini, ut creditur discipulus, Pieri us, Alexandrinae ecclesiae presbyter... Placidus ... Polychronius,, .Diodori Tarsensis episcopi auditor ... and on an earlier page Petrus, Edessenae Ecclesiae presbyter, scripsit in morem Sancti Ephrem Syro sermone Homilias etc .... and on the previous page Paulus, Emesae episcopus; and a little earlier Patrophilus Scythopoleos, Palaestinae episcopue, and on the previous page Pantaleon, magnae Dei ecclesiae diaconus etc. The reader can also verify a host of other names, both those which we have italicized and moii:t of the others. From Sixtus comes also the table of Babbis. PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY. 41

Enoch have disappeared, and the crowd of lesser men. Prester John's Library has shrunk to quite an attenuated form, and we are now in danger of expecting nothing from Abyssinia instead of expecting everything. A winter of discontent has followed rapidly on the glorious summer of Urreta's promises. We are reduced from the stately palace of Rasselas to a lodge in a garden of cucumbers. The attitude of despair is, however, as unreasonable as that of extreme hope. The libraries which gave us Enoch and the Book of Jubilees cannot be exhausted. It is not generally known that the English army swept up nearly 1000 MSS. at the capture of Magdala, and left 600 of them behind in a church on their return 1 to the sea-coast • It is much to be regretted that no sufficient band of Ethiopic scholars was attached to the Abyssinian expedition. Were those 600 volumes all prayer-books ? These books from the collection of king Theodore cannot, however, be held to have exhausted the MS. wealth of Abyssinia. And significant rumours have lately been reaching us of discoveries made in an island on one of the great Abyssinian lakes. Here is a notice from a German paper of March 16, 1894 (Theol. Lit.-Blatt): "Konig Menelek von Abessinien hat, nach der Meldung franzosischer Blatter, bei einer Expedition nach dem im Siiden seines Reiches gelegenen Zuai-See einen werthvollen Fund alt-athiopischer Manuskripte gemacht. Die Inseln dieses Sees galten immer als 'heilig' und die dortige schwer nahbare Be­ volkerung verwahrt trotz ihrer barbarischen Unbildung nach alter U eberlieferung die athiopischen Bticher als Heiligthiimer. Die auf der Insel Debra-Sina gemachten Funde sind theils liturgischen Inhalts, zum anderen Theil versprechen sie aber werthvollere Ausbeute. Der Konig beabsichtigt eine Dampferverbindung auf dem See h!"rzustellen, womit der sagenhafte Zauber der heiligen Inseln verschwinden wtirde." 1 Record of the Expedition to Abyssinia, ii. 396: " On the capture of Magda.la a large number of Ethiopian MSS. were found, having been carried there by Theodore from the libraries of Gondar and the central parts of Abyssinia during his late expedition, in which he destroyed very many Christian churches. On finding that Magda.la would have to be abandoned to the Gallas, it became necessary to provide for the safety of these volumes, which would otherwise have been destroyed by the Mohammedans. About 900 volumes were taken as far as Chelikot, and there about 600 were delivered to the priests of that church, one of the most important in Abyssinia; 359 books were retained for the purpose of scientific examination." 42 PRESTER JOHN'S LIBRARY.

What makes it practically certain that this is a true report which has reached Europe is that a similar statement with regard to the existence of the books will be found in the Journals of the missionaries Isemberg and Krapf: we find in their account (p. 179) as follows: "In the lake of Gurague called Suai five islands exist, in which the treasures of the ancient Abyssinian kings are said to have been hidden from Gragne [the Mohammedan desolator of Abyssinia] when he entered Abyssinia. That there are Ethiopic books is confirmed by a man whom the king sent as a spy." In all probability, then, it is the books mentioned by Isemberg and Krapf that have been brought to light by king Menelek ; and one can only hope that before long the contents of this newly­ found library may be rendered accessible to Western scholars. PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

(.A Paper read before the Society for Historical Theology, November 28, 1895.)

THERE are some learned men whose works it is almost im­ possible to read with a proper degree of scepticism; their ac­ quaintance with the subjects upon which they write is so wide, the considerations which they bring forward are so varied and new, the collateral information, both relevant and irrelevant, which they furnish is so stupendous, that the critical faculty becomes paralyzed in its most useful· members, in its power to doubt and to contradict; and it is 0ften only after long and weary_ study that we begin at last to realize that these great scholars were just as capable of running down a cul de sac as we are ourselves, and that we must resume with regard to them the habit of healthy distrust and apply it to many of their strongest and most elaborate demonstrations. Such is the temper of mind in which I am trying to read Lightfoot, the writer of all others in our time whose criticisms seem to defy challenge and escape contradiction; and the object of the present paper is to shew in a brief, but I hope conclusive manner, th\! accumulation of errors for which Lightfoot is respon-: sible in his treatment of a single problem of Church History, and the way in which our progress has been arrested by the erroneous hypothesis which he brought forward and his undue zeal in defending that hypothesis. I am referring to the question of Gaius the Presbyter, a famous third century writer, of whom Eusebius tells us that he wrote or held a dialogue against Proclus the Montanist in the days of Zephyrinus, and that he attacked in this dialogue the Chiliastic views which Cerinthus and others 44 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. deduced from the Apocalypse, and probably attacked the Apo­ calypse itself As far back as 1868 in an article entitled 'Gaius or Hippolytus,' published in the Journal of Philology, Lightfoot had maintained the. theory that Gaius was merely the double of Hippolytus; and he brought forward a number of confirmatory considerations, which were revised and amplified in his· Apostolic Fathers, a work in which, as I have intimated above, everything has the air of being final and infallible. These considerations were (i) that the historical allusions to Gaius agree exactly with parallel details in the life of Hippolytus; as, for instance, that they both flourished under Zephyrinus, that each was styled presbyter, that they both lived at Rome, that they were both learned men, that they both denied the Pauline authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews, that each was antimontanistic, and that, more obscurely, the title 'Bishop of the Gentiles,' whatever it may mean, seems to have been applicable to either of them. And (ii) further than th~se historical allusions there were literary confusions between Gaius and Hippolytus of an extraordinary kind, which were made worse by the modern critics who insisted on referring every anonymous work of Hippolytus to the shadowy Gaius, until at last, as Light­ foot allowed, they overdid the matter by trying to make Gaius the author of the Philosophumena. Now since the Philosophu­ mena is undoubtedly the work of Hippolytus, and the recognition of its authorship carries also the authorship of a number of lesser works which are in dispute, Gaius would have been a jay stripped of a mass of peacock's feathers and left to us merely as the author · of the Dialogue against Proclus the Montanist, if it had not happened that Lightfoot ingeniously stuck all the feathers on again by maintaining that Gaius was Hippolytus, and that even the Dialogue against Proclus was due to the latter father. His explanation was that the title of the Dialogue in question ran as follows: ~taXo,yos- I'atov ,cal, IIpolCA.OV ~ ,ca-ra Mov-ravto--rwv, and that Gaius is here either a literary lay-figure, which has given cause to a mass of subsequent misunderstandings, or that it is the actual prrenomen of Hippolytus. Now tnis was very ingenious ; moreover it rid us of the trouble­ some and perplexing figure of the Higher Critic (for such Gaius PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 45 certainly was) in the Roman Church; it disposed of a person who was of doubtful orthodoxy (for the fact that Gaius wrote against the Montanists is not a set-off against his attack on the Johannine writings; any stick is good enough to beat a Montanist dog), and it left us a clearer view of the classic form of the great pupil of Irenaeus, who seems to have never been guilty of anything worse than Novatianism, and who in other respects was a genuine malleus haereticorum. No doubt there is a certain advantage to be gained from the fact that heretics turn to shades and their works do follow them, while the orthodox defender of the Faith becomes more and more imposing and real, so that we may say, with Homer, oloi, 7rE7rvvrai, rol 0€ u,aal lduuovuiv· in no other way could the rule 'quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus' become verifiable. But, as it happens, in the case which we are studying, the shade has evaded the Charon who had ferried him over, and is back again, as in his last edition Lightfoot admits, in the upper air. The key to the problem, as in so many modern cases, is of Syrian manufacture. First of all, we are to set over against the fact of Gaius' attack on the Apocalypse, and the statement on the back of the chair of Hippolytus in the Lateran Museum that Hippolytus wrote a treatise V7r€p TOV KaTci 'Iwavv17v evaryryeXiov Kat O,'lrOKaA.vtewi, the remarkable entry made by the Syriac writer Ebed-jesu at the beginning of the 14th century that Hippolytus, Bishop and Martyr, wrote a treatise called a,~~ b~~ ri!.L, or 'Heads against Gaius.' This latter entry ought to have beE;Jn sufficient to prove that Gaius was an antagonist of Hippolytus and not his double; and taken with. the first two statements to make it highly probable that Gaius actually attacked both of the J ohannine writings, for the defence of Hippolytus is clearly a single work occupied with the Johannine matter in the Canon. But, unfortunately, we have not been in the habit of either studying or trusting Syriac writers in the degree that they deserve. The second direction from which the Syriac fathers come to our aid is Dr Gwynn's discovery 1 that Dionysius Bar-~alibi in his 1 Herniathena, vol. vi. pp. 397-418. 46 PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Commentary upon the Apocalypse, of which a copy is extant in 1 the British Museum ( of course unpublished), quotes from the very treatise referred to by Ebed-jesu, giving in a number of instances the substance of the objections made by Gaius to the Apocalypse and the replies of Hippolytus. The recovery of these passages enabled Dr Gwynn to affirm with certainty the separate identity of Gaius, and to prove that Gaius had rejected the Apocalypse from the Canon on the ground that it contained 'predictions mainly eschatological, irreconcilable with the words of our Lord and the teaching of St Paul ' ; and these views of Gaius were antagonized by Hippolytus in a treatise whose title was probably' Heads against Gaius ', and we are thus led to conjecture that the complete title was KecpaA.a£a /CaTtt ratov tnrip TOV ,canl 'I roaVV'l]V EV

1 Rich, 7185. PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 47 calypse, and from this it follows that the remarks which Gaius makes about Cerinthus and the sensuous millennium which he proclaimed in the name of a great_ Apostle, must be understood as a criticism of the Apocalypse and the Chiliastic interpretations of it. In the light of which recently acquired knowledge it is interesting to compare the misunderstanding of the situation involved in the following sentence from Lightfoot (Apost. Fathers, Pt. I. vol. ii. p. 386), "It is difficult to see how an intelligent person should represent the Apocalypse as teaching that in the kingdom of Christ' men should live in the flesh in Jerusalem and be the slaves of lusts and pleasures;' and again 'that a thousand years should be spent in marriage festivities.'" Amongst the people of ecclesiastical rank and dignity who held the view involved, though somewhat caricatured, in these words were Papias, Irenaeus, N epos and Victorinus of Pettau. They certainly were not all of them idiots, though perhaps we may allow Papias the title of ucf>oopa uµ.i!€p6,;; '1'0V voiiv. The fact is that Lightfoot did not do justice to the Chiliastic movement. Dr Gwynn is in the same case; in order to save the credit of the Apocalypse he ventures to suggest that Cerinthus " may have written a pseudo-Apocalypse, containing previsions of a millennium of carnal pleasures, and that Gaius, in his anti-millenarian over-zeal, may have rejected both Apocalypses, the genuine and the spurious alike." But since Cerinthus is credited with nothing worse than the rest of the Chiliastic succession, we have no reason to make him the author of a further Apocalypse, which would not also apply to the other fathers who are named, all of whom hold what their opponents call the 'sensuous millennium.' We must not multiply Apocalypses: the one which is certainly involved in the phenomena is sufficient for the explanation of the phenomena. And now for our problem; did Gaius write against the Fourth Gospel, yea or nay ? The answer will come from the same quarter as before, for the Syrian Church holds the keys of all the problell\s, Suppose we turn to Dionysius Bar-i;3alibi's Commentary upon St John, of which a Latin translation is preserved in the Bodleian Library\ made by Dudley Loftus from a MS. now in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin. We find the following sentence, which I give in Loftus' own words : ' l!'ell MSS. 6 and 7. 48 PRESBYTER G.A.IUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL.

Gaius haereticus reprehendat J ohannem quia non concors fuit 1 cum sociis, dicentibus , quod post baptismum abiit in Galilaeam, et fecit miraculum vini in Katna. Sanctus Hypolitus e contrario (I. adversus eum) scilicet, Christus postquam baptizatus fuerat, abiit in desertum, et quando inquisitio facta erat de illo per discipulos J ohannis et per populum, quaerebant eum et non inveniebant eum, quia in deserto erat, · cum vero finita fuisset tentatio et rediisset, venit in partes habitatas non ut baptizaretur, baptizatus enim jam fuerat, sed ut monstraretur a Johanne qui di.xit intuens eum, ecce Agnus Dei l baptizatus igitur fuit et abiit in desertum dum exquirerent eum, et quod vidissent eum bene persuasi erant, quis fuit, sed quo abiisset non sciverant, sed quando rediisset persuasit eis ex quo quod monstratus fuit a Johanne, crastino die vidit eum Johannes et dixit ecce agnus Dei ! istos quadraginta dies exquisiverunt eum et non viderunt eum ; peractis vero diebus tentationis, cum venisset et visus esset venit in Galilaeam; quapropter inter se conveniunt Evangelistae quia postquam rediisset Dominus noster a deserto eumque monstrasset Johannes, illi, qui vidissent eum baptizatum, apprehendissent patrem clamantem, non viderunt eum amplius, quia abiit in desertum, necesse habuit Johannes ut iterum testimonium hujus­ modi perhiberet de eo, quod hie est quam quaeritis et illinc abiit in Galilaeam virtute spiritus. Now this extract at first sight seems to dispose completely of Dr Gwynn's statement as to the acceptance of the Fourth Gospel by Gaius. There is, however, a textual difficulty. On comparing Loftus' rendering with two MSS. in the British Museum (Codd. Add. 7184 and 12,143), I find reason to suspect that the name of Gaius was not in the primitive draft of the Commentary. For example the MS. Add. '7184 begins as follows: ~~ f

mb.oal CIQ~~r< ~:IJ:l:t ' Of the holy Hippolytus against him,' immediately recalls the title 'Heads against Gaius.' And indeed there is no other candidate for the honour of the place of opposition. It is, moreover, interesting to compare the way in which the quotations are introduced with the passages quoted by Bar-~alibi in his commentary on the Apocalypse. The five cases given by Dr Gwynn are introduced as follows: r-' .,\ '\.., ""'-1 m .b.al:, 4a....JDa r.e; l"C" ac» c.\.a ~ ( i) : 'i.=l"C"a 'i.=l"C"a ~r< .a.:::.aa;:, ac»~~r< i.e. 'Gaius the heretic, who objected to this Revelation and said ... Hippolytus of Rome refuted him and said'

: -i.::ior< C!Qc.\.a~ (ii) f-!~ a.I f-!:,a, b.aa_l CIO~a..9.l"C" i.=::,.,r

•. ClOG.~ \cr.a:::,J ~;m (iii) 'i.=r

•. cioa..~ (iv) . ~al CIQ~~r< i. e. Gaius: Hippolytus against him ••.

•. \mr< ~r<;rHeresy, that of the people whom he calls the Alogi. It is commonly supposed that this title is an invention of Epiphanius to describe the people who did not believe in the J ohannine writings, which contain the Doctrine of the Logos. And Epiphanius actually says in c. 3 T{ cf,a

TOVVTH, also c. 8 Ti ovv ep

Epiph. Hae1·. Ii. o. 34. Gaius. l(a{ .r:1, And the angels were loosed, Aiia-011 'l"OVS 'fEUuapas ayyl>.ovs .,-o;,s E1TI .,-oii which were prepared for sea­ EvcppaTOv· /Cal fKovua .,.;,,, ap,Op,011 .,-oii UTpaTov, sons and for days to slay the p.op,ai /,tvp,a3Es l(al x,'Auu x1X1allu, 1Cal ~rrav third part of men (Rev. ix. lvaEavp,ivo, {)a,paKaS rrvp{vovs l(al BmJans l(Ol 15). On this Caius says: va1C1116l11ovs. 'E110µ1ua11 ylip al 'fOIOV'fO&, 1'1 7r1J It is not written that angels apa ')'El\01011 EU'flJI 1 d>.q6na· lli11 yl,p >.,yy 'l"OVS are to make war, nor that a .,-iuuapas ayyl>.ovs 'l"OVS EJ/ T'f> Evcppa.,-y 1Ca6E­ third part of men is to (op,l11ovs, z~a lMb., Tas .,-iuuapas l'Jmcpoplis .,..;;,, perish : but that nation shall EIC.wo11, l(al Ba,SvJ\c.111101 lv ](p611a,s to war, but that four nations mlTov, M11801 lJ,1 lJ,ElJl~all'fo, /J,E'f' av.,-oiis lJ,1 are to arise out of the region Ilipum, o!v ,rproTos y•yav• Kiipos o ,SauLA,{;s. which is 7zy Euphrates and to Tit -yClp 'l6VtJ WO dyy£Aovs- TfTayp.Eva ~lulv, w~ come against the earth and 1 See Lightfoot, Lectures on St John. PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 53

Eff'LfLO-fYMJpii. p.ot M@iiuijs- o ayws- TOV 0EOV 8Epa- to war with mankind. But 7T@P, TOV Xoyov l(aTa O.l(O>..ov8[a11 EP/J,7JVEV6>V l(al this that he says, four angels Xiy@v, 'E1rEpOOT7JfTOV TOV 11"aTipa O"OV l(al ayyElEt is not alien from Scripture. uoi, To./ir 1rpEu/3VTipovr l(al lpovul uo,· "OTE Moses said, When He disJ)fl'rsed btEµ,ipl(Ev o v,f.,tO"TOS' w.,,,,, .Jr lJti0"1l"EtpEv vfovr the sons of Adam, He set the 'Abaµ,, tO"T7JO"EV opta l811ro11 l(aTa dp,8µ011 ayyi>..@v boundary of the nations cw­ 0Eoir l(al iyEV7/87J µ£plr l(Vplov >..aor atrrOV cording to the numher of the 'Ia/(Ji{:J, uxolv,uµ,a l()..7Jpo110µ,las- mlroii 'lupa1X, angels of God (Deut. xxxii. 8). El otiv ra t8V7J WO ayyi>..ovr £lut TETayµ,i11a, Since therefore nations have lJ,l(a[@r £l1rE, Avuov Tour Tiuuapa. dyyiAovr been assigned to angels, and roV, lv T'fl EVcf>pllrn 1<.a8ECoµlvovs «al £n-£xoµ.l-- each nation pertains to one 11ovs- l1ttTpE1r~,.,, To'is- EIJ11EULV ~z~ 1rOAEµ.ov, lIDt angel, John rightly declared l(atpoii µal(pa8vµlas l(Vplov, trur 1rpouratn a.' by the Revelation a loosing a1'T@v l1e.ll1.1<.lav yEvlu6ai rc»v a"Vroii ll')'lcov. ,,E,cpa .. for those four angels : who roiivro yap ol lmrErayµ,i110, ayyEAOI V'liO raii a:e the Persians and the 11"VEvµaros- µ~ tXOVTES' l(atpov lmlJpoµijr, fai', TO Medes and the Babylonians /LT/71"6> Avnv avro,r r,}v b{1C7Jv, TOV T(l Ao,1ra: t8V7J and the Assyrians. Since >..vEo-Bai £11£1(£11 tjr 1rpos- rovs aylovs- v{3pErus. then those angels who have Avovra, 31 ol roioiiro, l(at l1r,pxovra1 rf, yf, .Jr been appointed over the na­ 'I@a1JV7JS 7Tporf>T/rEVEt ICat ol >..011rol 1rpocpijra,. tions have not been comman­ Ka, yap l(tllOVJJ,EIIOI ol ayyE>..o, l(lVOVO"L ra t8V7J Els ded to stir up those who opµ~v ll(lJtl(las. "Ori lJi m,plvovs 1eal Bm.lbnr have been assigned to them, ,ea, val(tVBlvovs- t)cJpa,cas- O"T/µalvEt, ovbEtS' dµcp,• a certain bond of the power (3&>..>..Et. 'ErcE,va yap ra t81Jf} &1ro rijs TO&aVTT/S' of the word is indicated which xpoas tXEL ~v dµ,cpiau,v. Ta /J,fl' y,\p 8Eiwa.,, restrains them until the day lµana xpaa rlr f(TTI µ,71Ai1171 OVT6> rca>..ovµ,.,,,, shall arrive and the Lord of EpEa. ,-(l cJE 1r'Up,va, tva E11tn ,-(1 l(OtcKqpci Eva1J ... all shall command. And µ,aTa, Kat ua11:lv8,va, iva lJE[~ r,}v 11:a>..>..atv.,,v this then is to happen when lpEav. Antichrist shall come, The parallelism between the two lines of defence is so striking that it betrays a common origin, and this must be the work of Hippolytus, which has been rehandled by Epiphanius, and which appears, perhaps in an abbreviated form, in the extracts of Bar­ $alibi. Such an abbreviation might be due to Bar-$alibi himself, or to the fact that the Heads against Gaius is a summary of a larger work. But if th"is be the case, that we are dealing with lost Hippoly­ tean and Gaian matter, we cannot limit ourselves to the single passage in which Epiphanius and Bar-f;falibi agree. We must group together all the extracts in the two writers which defend the Apocalypse, and regard them as the residue of a single lost work; after which we must make a similar investigation with regard to the Fourth Gospel. We thus learn, over and above what Bar-f;falibi tells us, that 54 PRESBYTER G.A.IUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. the Alogi objected to the machinery of the Apocalypse, especially to the Angels and Trumpets ; and that they criticised the Epistle to Thyatira, on the ground that no Church existed in Thyatira in St John's day. And the same method of enquiry holds with regard to the relation of Gaius to the Fourth Gospel: for we find Epiphanius dealing with a series of objections made to the Chronology of the Fourth Gospel and to special disagreements between St John and the Synoptics, and we shall see that under both these heads he is dealing with Hippolytean matter; the replies are the replies of Hippolytus, rehandled by Epiphanius, and the Chronology is the Hippolytean modification of the work of Julius African.us. We have shewn from Bar-~alibi a single instance of a Gaian objection to the Fourth Gospel, viz. the discordant accounts of the events connected with the Baptism. And when we turn to Epiphanius we find that the very first objection of the Alogi which he refutes is this very difficulty. auJCovui ,yap JCa0' f Al J \ ,, \ ~ 1"\ 0 f f1 J ,k "" \ eavTruv, ov ,yap evrrotµ,£ JCaTa TTJ'- a"-'IJ eia-., on ov uvµ,'t'ruvei Ta a1hov fJtf3'>,.la Toi-. Xot'IToi-. a'ITouToXoi-.. Here Epiphanius is working on a text which read frlpoi-. for which he gives Xot'IToi-.; for we find the equivalent sentence in Bar-~alibi: quia non concors fuit cum sociis (i.e. fratpot-.). The form of the objection turns upon the quotation of a number of verses from the beginning of the Gospel, such as : 'O 'lruavv71-. µ,apTvpei, A':at /CEl'parye, Xlryruv C>'T£, OOTO',' ECTTtv &v el'TrOV vµ,,v· /CQI, OT£, oiTO',' ECT'ttv o aµ,vD',' TOV 0eov, o atpcov T~V aµ,apnav• I TOV~ l'OCT/J,OV.' f'Q£' 1'a 0 E5"7l','1:~ ..,,71ut,,I,. K at \ €£'TrOV.. avTp' " 0£< a1'ouuavTe,;-, 'PafJfJ';,, 'TrOV µ,eve'i,;- ; fiµ,a OE ev Taimji, Tfi E'Trat1piov, 1 ..,,11u1v,,I,. \ 1/'0 El\,'TJCTEVt-,. ES"€"''f: -..0 €£1)" €£','> TT/V\ r Qf\,£1\,atav"I. "'> ' /Cat\ evptCTl'Et< I ,,..,t'Tr'TrOV,"\. /Cat Xe7e£ avTp o ·1,.,,uov,;-, 'AKoXov0et µ,ot. Kal µ,eTa TOVTO o;\,lryrp 'ITpou'0 ev ..,,71ut,A..'K' at µ,eTa'"'' Tpet,;- '1//J,Epa,;- ryaµ,o,;-',,eryevETo ev'K"'"' av'f T1/',' I'aXi:>i,ala,;- A':Te. Epiphanius' reply is long and diffuse; he begins by pointing out that the same method of criticism might be applied to the internal disagreements of the Synoptics; how, for example, are we to piece together the infancy accounts in Matthew and Luke; and how are we to place the visit of the Magi and the flight into Egypt, so as to be in harmony with the presentation of Christ in the Temple etc. The criticism of the Alogi who accepted the PRESBYTER GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL, 55 Synoptics could thus be easily directed against themselves. When at length Epiphanius comes to the discussion of the J ohannine passage, he explains that the Lord, after his baptism, went into the wilderness, returned to Nazareth, and afterwards came back again to the Jordan where John was baptizing: rva O€lfy }',€Ta \ I r, ,.. "\ ,,,,, ... Ta~ T€ IC'TJPVTTOVTO,. au-roil T6V 0€/CTOV eviavTov ,cvplov ICTE. And certainly he argues, the Lord did preach the acceptable year, because for the first year of his ministry he met with general acceptance, but after that with opposition! This ingenious argument shews that Epiphanius is trying to m~t rid of the theory of a single year of the ministry, which he found in his sources. Now it would be very interesting if we could compare the Chronology which Epiphanius gives with that of Hippolytus either as it existed in the Ohronica or as we are entitled to assume that it must have existed in the defence of the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse (for certainly Hippolytus must have dealt with the objection made by the Alogi on the subject of the Passovers ). 56 PRESBYTER GA.IUS A.ND THE FOURTH GOSPEL, But unfortunately we are dealing here with lost documents. What does seem clear is that Epiphanius has been tinkering the data before him ; for he alters the date of Christ's death, which in the Hippolytean tradition is usually the consulate of the two Gemini, and makes it two years later, by assuming in the life of our Lord two further consulates, of which the first is that of Rufus (Fufius) and Rubellio (who are in fact the Gemini over again); and the second is the consulate of Vinicius and Longinus Cassius. It is clear that such a confusion as this cannot be due to Hippolytus, and we suspect that some one has been trying to add a couple of years to the tale. But in the next place when we compare the list of consuls given by Epiphanius for the first thirty years of our Lord's life with the table in the Chronographer of 354 which is taken from the Hippolytean table of 234, we find that Epiphanius has placed the birth of Christ two consulates earlier than the Chrono­ grapher; and this again suggests an attempt to gain two years in our Lord's life by some one who was working on a chronicle of 31 years which he was trying to turn into one of 33 years. Now whether all of this confusion is due to Epiphanius, or whether part of it is due to Hippolytus who has emended the 31 year life of Christ which appears in his paschal cycle into some system more consistent with the Gospels, I am not at present prepared to say; it is possible that the correction is due to more than a single reformer. At all events, we may be confident that Hippolytus in dealing with Gaius must have had to face the difficulty of the Chronology, and if he did not succeed in abandoning the theory of the accept­ able year, Epiphanius must have done it for him, and done it with much blundering. But behind all these confused data of Epiphanius there must lie the Hippolytean tables as they were taken from Africanus. And perhaps some day we may be able to say how much of the work of Africanus has escaped mutilation at the hands of those who worked him over. We have shewn, then, that Epiphanius in his 51st heresy, that of the Alogi, is using material which was taken in part at least from the reply of Hippolytus to Gaius in defence of the fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse. And it is clear, since Hippolytus would not have been defending what no one was attacking, that objections were still current at Rome in the early part of the third century to PRESBYT1'R GAIUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 57 the canonicity of the fourth Gospel. How much is involved in this admission as regards the existence of a previous succession of adverse Higher Critics, is difficult to say. In the case of the Apocalypse the objection taken can easily be seen to be early and constant and widely diffused. Whether criticism of the same intensity was applied to the fourth Gospel, we have no means of determining: but it is a fixed point gained to have restored, as Dr Gwynn has done, the personality of Gaius : and to have defined, as we hope to have done, his position as a critic. AN EXTRACT FROM THE COMMENTARY OF DIONYSIUS BAR­ f?ALIBI ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN (c. ii. v. 1).

Ff'om (A) Cod. Mus. Britt. Add. 7184, f 2432 wuh sonw variants from (B) Cod. Mus. Britt. Add. 12,143.

: .a::oa;:, aaa,\.l~r< ~~:,

t-'=!I t4-a.J. ~.~ C.Ut<.L c:n..::,:, ~:u, T'C::IJa..

r<~a ~ ~ m::a:, 0 a:, ~;~ T'C::IJc.\.aO • chJr< .\m ~a ~~ ~;r< ;~o .r<-i.=:i.=l .!,r<

.1 ~ c:n.=IJ:, .. m.. \.» !l,!!r,. ~:r.a T'C::IJa..

m::a:, oa:, ~;~ T'C::IJa.. • r<~~ t';~ .. m~a

r< ~o~:, 2 ""-1 a, r<"chl. ~:, l"C::Qa.. . ro:-:\ .\~ ~

~:, t'1-»a,a.l r<°O

1 A (not B) adds on ma.rg. in a late hand: m~ l.a.z.:, am r

3 A (not B) adds over line in a late hand QO a..~ PRESBYTER GA.IUS AND THE FOURTH GOSPEL. 59

~acr.1 ~a • f<'i=:i=l ~ :s,.!::m..:, ;b ..., ,. , • .,, ~ ~a twa.a:, .. ma~~ ~ cr.1~ f<'~ t<'i::,:,.!::111.::):, .am.=, • ..am~f<' ~ c:n.l . aam ~a

..c:,~ f<'~f<' "\ma t"'l!l~ ..ba.z. t':, ~ • f<'aa:a ~ r

. r<~t<:, cr.1-i=r< r

. f<'aa::i .a ma ck. f<' t=:'3!1 • a::i . a am l' m a. -, ... cr.10 f<'I-N:, a

012.&.!!1.!"C' \cr.1 ~a • aam ~:i.a ~ l,t< ~~a i...::a:, re,.,~ . twa.a t=='3 ~o.u~r<:, :1,..1...::) • ~f<'

~ m.::, • r< c:n.l r<:, m -i.:::,3 f<' a cr.1 . -i.:::,3 f<' a t1» a.a .a en.a \.a.I ~a::i ;ba . ..amar<\J.I ~a ..aa:aa~ ~a... ~ir< t':,.:::o • ...,\ .\ ~ f<' ~f<' ... '-» ~r

... cr.1a.L... :,Cl2.AZ.l:, ~a.a ,D.lck.mr< • r<-i-=~ h:1 l,r< ~~ ~C\ • ~c\uf<' ~:, aJCD!I .,.m.::, : ~c.\l.&l~ ...,\.\ '-.) EUTHALWS AND EUSEBIUS.

BY the publication of his researches into th~ problems as­ sociated with the name of Euthalius of Alexandria, Prof. Robinson has laid all New Testament scholars under a great debt of gratitude. If his Euthaliana had done nothing more than restore to us a number of pages of the famous Codex H of the Pauline Epistles by the simple process of reading the impress of the ink of the perished pages upon the pages which remain, it would have been a distinct paleographical triumph. For it must be re­ membered that this MS. of which the extant leaves are scattered over the libraries of Paris, St Petersburg, Moscow, Kieff, Turin and Mt Athos, has been the object of study of a great many pairs of eyes that are usually in the habit of seeing. Dr Gregory, acting as literary executor to Tischendorf, had certainly planned an edition of the H-fragments, and made preparation for that edition, yet he does not seem to have suspected that the worn and stained pages had a double tale to tell, and could furnish the text of leaves lost as well as of leaves preserved. We also made a careful study of this Codex, so far as its Paris fragments are concerned, yet it never dawned upon our minds that the set-off on the pages belonged to a different set of pages than those which were extant; nor did the thought occur to us when, not long since, we were examining the Athos fragments. These Athos leaves were also examined by Duchesne1, but neither does he appear to have suspected that there was any supplementary evidence forthcoming from the manuscript. More curious still, M. Omont in publishing an edition of the St Petersburg leaves, actually read a lost page of the MS. by the

1 Archives des Mi;isions scientifiques et littfrail'ea, ser. 3, vol. 3. Paris, 1876. EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 61 reversed writing, but does not seem to have applied his method to any further leaves either at Paris or St Petersburg. It is, therefore, a distinct triumph and a very welcome increase to our knowledge that Prof. Robinson, working independent of us all, has been able to read, without serious lacunae, sixteen fresh pages of this valuable text. But, valuable as this increment to our knowledge is, it is only a small part of Mr Robinson's services to the critic who occupies himself with the supposed Euthalian text of the Epistles and the shadowy editor of that text. He has passed under review almost the whole of the literature of the subject from Zacagni onwards, with the view of determining all that can be known with regard to the person and work of Euthalius. And in so doing he has shewn a remarkable grasp of critical methods, far beyond what one is used to look for in English work. Nor is the study the less interesting because the author displays such evident delight in knocking down all the ninepins which recent students of Euthalius had set up, including Ehrhard, Dobschiitz, Conybeare and myself. 'The scholar's melancholy,' as Shakespeare says, 'is emulation.' We have sometimes a touch of the complaint ourselves, and Prof. Robinson will not be angry if we indulge the hope that, as far as our own ninepins are concerned, we may be able to set some of them up again. At least that is the object of the following pages. But whether we succeed in our attempt or not, we have a good hope that we shall not leave the subject without adding to our knowledge something which will be of permanent value. This is the third time, I think, that I have approached the Euthalian problems. The first occasion was when in connexion with the study of the Stichometry of ancient MSS. I came across the collection of Euthalian and Ps.-Euthalian data which Zacagni had amassed in his Oolleotanea Monumentorum Veterum, and under­ took to prQve, as against the traditional view held by Scholz, Scrivener and others, that the lines numbered by Euthalius were not sense-lines (cola and oornmata, as they are sometimes called) but space-lines of which the unit of measurement is a 16-syllabled hexameter. There has been no exception taken to this demon­ stration (nor is it easy to see how any exception was possible, for the investigation was self-verifying); but a new point has been raised by Prof. Robinson who questions with great propriety why . we should attribute to Euthalius at once the art of writing the . 62 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS.

N.T. in sense-lines, and the counting of the N.T. and attached matter in space-lines. He proposes, therefore, to divide the Euthalian materials, speaking roughly, between two artists of whom one, Euthalius, should write the Acts and Epistles in cola, and add certain prologues, while the other, whom he identifies with an Evagrius who appears in the subscription to certain Euthalian MSS. (notably in Cod. H, as recent investigations have shewn) should publish an editio minor of the Euthalian text and materials and be responsible for the stichometry, properly so called, of the text and prologues. This suggestion has a great air of probability about it. For the present we leave it on one side, as we hope to re-open the investigation from a fresh quarter. Most of what we had said upon the interpretation of the Euthalian lines will be found reprinted in the little volume 1 Stiohometry • The second attack which we made upon the Euthalian problem dealt with the obscure personalities of the writer and of the person to whom the work was dedicated. It is well known that there is a great air of uncertainty about the titles prefixed to the works attributed to Euthalius. The MSS. speak, but by no means uniformly, of Euthalius of Sulci, but no one knows where Sulci is, not even Prof. Robinson, for it is almost impossible to refer the work to Sardinia, where a place of that name is known ; they make Euthalius a bishop, but we cannot identify either him or his diocese. His first work, that on the Pauline Epistles, is based upon the previous work of a pious father whom he does not name, though he speaks of him flatteringly enough, and the influence has not been an unnatural one that the father in question was not exactly in the very odour of sanctity; and internal evidence has been produced which suggested that the great nameless one might perhaps be Theodore of Mopsuestia. In the second part of his work, that which deals with the Acts and the Catholic Epistles, Euthalius (whoever he was) expressly addresses in his prologues a father of the name of Athanasius ; _but here, too, the critic found a difficulty, for of the actual dates found in the Euthalian prefaces one (A.D. 396) was too late for Athanasius the Great, and the other (A.D. 458), which might seem to refer the work to the time of the second Athanasius, appeared not to be due to the hand of the original author of the Prologues. 1 Stichometry, Cambridge University Press Warehouse, 1898. EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 63 At this point I took up the matter with the object of proving that the name of Athanasius which occurs in the Prologues to the Acts and· Catholic Epistles is an orthodox substitute for an un­ orthodox name which has disappeared; and, guided by what seemed to me an obvious and repeated play upon words in the Euthalian text, where there were frequent and significant allusions to MeA.ET'1J or study, I maintained that the work was originally dedicated to a father of the name of Meletius upon whose name Euthalius was playing, and that its true title was Eti0a)..{ov 7rpoi; MeXfrwv. The subordinate question, as to which of the possible Meletii of doubtful ecclesiastical repute was the one to whom the book was dedicated was decided, perhaps too rapidly, in favour of Meletius of Mopsuestia, the pupil and successor of the great Theo­ dore. In making this identification, I was, of course, influenced by the first of the two dates (A.D. 396) found amongst the Euthalian matter, which I took to be the true date of Eutha­ lius. But to all this Prof. Robinson takes exception: according to him the date 396 is not the date of Euthalius, but of his successor Evagrius, and consequently we have no chronological difficulty to get over in accepting the ascription of certain MSS. and of the text itself to Athanasius; while, as to the supposed play upon a name, while not entirely denying that there is something of the kind involved, he thinks that it is merely a play upon a word capable of two senses, because MeA.ET'1J, which I take to be the key-word to the understanding of the prologues, is a word which may mean either study or training in the athletic sense: accord­ ing to which interpretation, since the word training is susceptible of a double sense even amongst ourselves, we are to understand Euthalius as saying ' 1 recommend to you my foster-sister and friend, the. appropriately named lady, Madam Training.' And Prof. Robinson concludes by saying, 'I cannot myself think that a case is made out for any deletion of the name Meletius at all.' With which observation he finally knocked over my ninepin l Now, as far as I am concerned, I have no special objection to be put in the wrong, but inasmuch as we are obliged by Euthalius to sing the praises of Mistress Study, whoever she was, and the praise ought not to be mere superficial adulation, it might be as well to make the examination a little more closely concerning these 64 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. two points, the question of the supposed Meletius whom I maintain to have been erased, and the subordinate issue as to the date of Euthalius. The latter question can, indeed, be treated indepen­ dently of the former; for, a.<; Mr Robinson allows, if A.D. 396 is the date of Evagrius and not of Euthalius, there is at least one other Meletius of an earlier date, viz. Meletius of Antioch, who might be a candidate at once for ecclesiastical disgrace and the hand of Melete; but I shall not abandon the date 396 for Eutha­ lius without applying to the su~ject some more of the sleepless discipline which Euthalius praises; and as for Melete, who has engaged me as well as the pious father of antiquity in her toils, if I find her fallacious, she shall be burnt for a witch. And so we come to our third contribution to the Euthalian problem, which is the relation of the prologues of Euthalius to the text of Eusebius. According to Robinson (and the impression is not an unnatural one), Euthalius is a very original writer, with a 'great wealth of expression,' a person who can not only talk in high-sounding Greek, but who would also not sully his style by 'repeating his own language in a slavish manner': in other words a literary artist of some eminence whose commodity of words and of ideas (which words are meant either to express or to conceal) is something more than A beggarly array of empty boxes, Of musty packthread and old cakes of roses. I will confess that, until recently, I shared with Mr Robinson this idea of Euthalius; he was one of the writers who drove one to the dictionary, and such we always respect-and hate. But I hope to be able to shew that this grandeur of style is only apparent, and that, in reality, one of the main uses of the swollen speech of Euthalius is to furnish various readings for the text of Eusebius ! In the first place, then, we observe that Euthalius himself has directed us to Eusebius as one of his sources : he tells us, in his Prologue to the Pauline Epistles (Zacagni, p. 531) as follows: EvI ' t ">. I I 1: > I otaTpt 'I' at tcai 'l'DV 'l'DV .t;-eov ,.,o,yov a,cw,.,vTw<; tc'l}pv,.ai €7rt 'Pwµ,17<, 'TOV IIavXov &vE'TOll Ota'Tp{,Jrat /Ca& 'TOV 'TOV 0eoii Xoryov UICW­ XVTW', IC1]pt'JEat E7TtU1J/J,VVll/J,€llO',. Tou µ€V ovv U7TOAO"f1JUaµ,evov ave,,, E7T'l- 'T~ll 'TOV 1C1JpVryµ,aTO<; Ota/COV£av A0"/0', exel u·nlXau0at Tov a7ToUToXov. We see then the way in which Euthalius appropriates his author, and we could easily extend our recognition of the matter borrowed from Eusebius by examination of the immediate context. But, for the present, let it suffice to shew that the Bcclesiastical History of Eusebius is one of the sources of Euthalius. A second source may be identified by a reference to c. 3 of the Pauline prologue (Z. p. 529) where Euthalius tells us as follows: 'Ava-y1Cafov 0€ iJ'Y1JUll/J,1Jll Ell f]paxel, 11:at 'TOV xpovov E'1T'IU'Yf­ µ,ELwuau0at 'TOV 1Cr;pvryµ,aTO<, IIavXoii EiC 'TO)ll XPOlll1'Wll /Cal/OVWV Euue/3fov 'TOV IIaµ,iXov 'T~V avalCe 1CTe., where from the very language we are led to expect that quotations are coming, or at all events, statements which are the equivalent of quotations. And we shall shew tliat Euthalius actually had the Chronicon open before him, as well as the History to which, as we have already pointed out, he refers on a subsequent page. He begins his extracts by saying that the Passion of our Lord occurred in the 18th year of Tiberius. The passage of the Chronicon from which this is taken is preserved in Syncellus (614. '7): . 'I11uov<; 0 Xptu'TO<; 0 vlo<; 'TOV 0€0V a ICVpto<; i]µ,wv ICa'Tli. Ta<; '1T'Ept' aV'TOV ' ~ '1T'PO'f'1)'T€ta<;"' ' €7r£' ' 'TO' 7Ta'0 or; 7rpop€l' E'TOV','' l 0' 'T1J',~ T ,,..,eptova ' f)autXElar;. The Hieronymian version of the Chronicon gives the xviiith year, the Armenian agrees with Syncellus in giving the xixth year. Euthalius then alludes to the election of the seven deacons, and in particular of Stephen, in the following terms :

H. H. 5 66 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS.

Kal µe6' nµepac; Ttvti<; aXl,yac; elSov €/CEt ,rpoxeipt1;oµhov<; TOtl~ 'A,roa--ro"A.ovc; I et<;• oia,covtav~ ' -rov' av-ro..,,epwvvµ,ov, ,I,. I .:.,re..,,avov~ ',I,. icai\ -rove; \ aµ,cf>i av-r6v. Of this we find, in spite of Euthalius' express statement, no trace in the Chronicon, but on looking into the History (H. E. ii. 1) we find Ka0la-Tav-rat ... elc; '8iaicov{av .. ,/J,v'8pec; '8e'8oKtµaa-µ,evo£ TOV aptO­ µov E7rTd, o[ aµ,cf>i TOV I-recf>avov, where the coincidences in language will be noticed, and then a little lower Eusebius speaks of Stephen as follows: ,rpw-ror;;"' -rov' avTtp , """ ..,,epwvvµ,ov,I.._ , -rwv"' a,;iov,icrov,-~ I -rov,.. Xptu-rov ~ µ,ap-rvprovf a1ro.,,epe-ratI ,I..' a-Te..,,avov1,1.,. 1 . And here a curious fact comes to light, viz. that Euthalius has failed to understand Eusebius' language. Eusebius speaks of Stephen as bearing away the martyr's crown, which is appropriately named (a-Teepwvvµov and applied it to Stephen, without mentioning the crown to complete the parallel. He might have contented himself with calling Stephen cpepwvvµoc; and leaving his readers to see the obvious play upon the name ; but he was appropriating from Eusebius, and not ' mixing his paints with brains,' and so we have the impossible reading which appears in Cod. Boeclerianus as avnp cf>epmvvµ,ov, in other MSS. as a single impossible word avTocf>epwvuµ,ov, in Cod. Lollinianus by 2 emendation as ,ravu cpepwvvµ,ov • And lest there should be any doubt about the fact that Euthalius has been appropriating Eusebian language, we can compare with the foregoing passage from Eusebius the language in which Eutbalius speaks of the martyrdom of Paul (Z. 522): T

avtp KaTEKOO"/J/'781]. Cf. also Euseb. Mart. Pal. 3 -rov -rrov lepovlKrov Ti,<: Oeoa-efJeLac; a'0" 11.'l}TOJV ~ a-Te.,,avovIA,. a,r'l}ve,ytca-ro,I / and Mart. Pal. 9 Oeitp KaTeKoa-µ10'11 µ,ap-rvpirp etc. Euthalius continues his discussion of the Pauline chronology, and presently he makes the statement that Paul continued 1 With this oomparc Syncellns, 621. 4: 'E71"Ta TOY &.p,IJµ.ov, lioKE< µ.o,, 1rpor {nr11perrla11 TWP &.lle:\.p.;., {nro rw11 d1rorrro:\w11 KaTE~XtlCa -rij,; 'IovSala,; !rreµ,6va efew,µ,t-e. ( 632. 17) E'11't av-rov IIav>..o,. l/'11'6 'lovSa[rov ICa'TTJ"/OPTJ0Ei,; 'Ti]V awoXo"llav wewolTJTat. After describing Paul's appeal to Rome, Euthalius continues (Z. 531): uvvijv Se avT

V ,cal el1C6Tro,. uvvatxµ,aXroT6v '11'0IJ Tf.OV €'11'lUTOXr.ov awo,caXeZ, ,cat Aov,cas O 'Tit" wpafet<; TWV 'AwoUT6Xr,>V ,ypafi wapaSov,;. But this is taken, word for word, from the History (H. E. ii. 22) : and shortly after this the quotation from the History is continued in language which we transcribed above. A little lower down Euthalius tells us, against which we will set the Eusebian parallels, as follows : Euthal. (Z. 532). Euseb. H. E. ii. 25. av,iXo µ,v 'A-ypt'INl"lvav ?Tp@Ta Tqv p,17Tlpa a. oµofo,s Kal all,')..cpovs Kai llJlav P,'7T -yivu 1ra'rpbr, ,cal 'O,craoviav T,jv laur«p yv­ 1TpO11 av,'iA£ TqV lavToii P.'7TEpa 'A-yp11N1"lvav l(at TqV TOV ?TaTpos alJEXcp~v. Euseb. Chron. Armen. Neron cum aliis viris illustribus et Hochtabiam uxorem suam inter­ fecit. Euseb. Chron. ap. Cedrenum 360. 17. l(at dAAOVi' µup,ovr T<:> ')'£11£1 ?rpoury­ l(OVTas. Euthalius continues: Euseb. H. E. ii. 25. P,ET£1TE£Ta lJi 1v f7TlJp°'7 uqla­ l

\ , ,.. I , ,.. , ""\. I .rl,. t I~ • , "' 7T'f!P£ µev T'YJ<; 7rpOOT'YJ<; avTov a'TT'o"'ory£a<; ..,,autUJJV Tave ev T'[l ' , "\. , 1 , , "-, ,.. \ NI 'TT'pWT'[l µov a7T'Ol\,O,Y£']- ••• e!C

ev' T'[/ " 'TT'PWT'[l , µov, .,,11uw,"' ' a'1T'Ol\,ory,q. , ' ' .. ,l\,f!OVTO<;,... ' TOV ' N'epwva TaVT'[l, ci><; €0£/CE, Out TO roµo0vµov 7rpOCTf!£'1T'WV ••. ev 777 avTfi 7rpol\.e,yei

A.." ,I.., 0 , ' ' >I<;' ' ,;- ,,,_, ,ypa.,,y ..,,atTICWV €,YID ,yap TJD'YJ tT'TT'f!VOOP,at ... e..,,etTT'YJ"f!V. But enough has been said to shew that Euthalius is for the most of his time a plagiarist, as well as sometimes a blunderer. Will it be said in reply that it was quite natural that he should use the Chronicon and the History in writing the life of the Apostle Paul, and that, at all events, he has confessed to borrow­ ing? It usually happens that debts confessed are only a fraction of those contracted, and an examination of the rest of Euthalius' work will confirm that proposition. If he should be original anywhere, it ought to be in his opening remarks, where he explains the scope of the work which he has undertaken and is untrammelled by history or by chronology. But is it so ? Let us turn to the prologue to the Acts (Z. p. 404 ), and see whether it reads like the work of an original and fecund mind. We find him telling us of the new and difficult path that he has to tread in making his edition of the Acts: oM Tt<; 7rcv;\o,;; a/3ao7Jc; ~ veoc; aµa8~c; ep~µ71v oodv /Cal. aTpt/317 Uvat 7rpO n ,;> / \ n n ,I." / • JU. oEvpo Oll:,YV(J)V 7r€pt TOVTD T1J'> ,ypa.,,'T]c; TaVT1Jc; €£<;

1 2 Tim. iv. 16, • 2 Tim. iv. 5. EU'fHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 69 But when we turn to the opening chapter of the Ecclesiastical History, the secret is out, for here we find €71"€£ /Cal 1rpw-rot vvv T~', v1ro0ea-ero', Jm/3&vT€', ola nva JpiJµ'YJV /Ca/, a-rpt/3fj levat ooov E,YXHpovµev, and somewhat further on 'Avaryl(,atoTaTa oe µ,ot 1rove'ia-0at T~V v1r60ea-iv ~'Yovµat OTt

µ,,.,oeva '1T(l) el., oevpo TWV €1(,ICA,'YJUla(TTt/CWV O"V"f"f Pacf,erov OtE"fVroV 7r€pi, TOUTO TTJ', ,ypacJ,-;; .. (T'lrOVO~v 7r€7r0t'YJµevov 'Tb µepo',. Further the expression ouot 'TdV 0e1,ov i1rpeu/3evuavTo AO"fOV may be compared with the opening sentences of Eusebius ()uot -re Kara "f€VEav €1(,{1,G'T'1JV l.uypacf,ro', ~ Kat cha uv,y,ypaµµam,w TOV 0e'iov €7rpea-{3evuav AO"fOV KT€. Other coincidences in thought and expression may be noted 1, and it follows that the loans which Euthalius makes on Eusebius are not limited to a single section, but that he is a systematic plagiarist. It will be admitted, I think, that the dependence of Euthalius upon Eusebius is established: but it may well be questioned whether it does not go much further than our identifications, and whether it does not involve other authors beside Eusebius. 'l'ake, for example, the Pauline prologue in which Euthalius speaks in such choice language of the reasons which led him to his task, and of his own ecclesiastical obedience to the superiors who set him at the work. At first sight these sentences appear to be the most original in the whole document and to have the flavour of real history. No one would suspect, at the first reading of these personal statements on the part of Euthalius, that they constitute a conventional opening to a new book. But that such is the case will, I think, be clear by comparing with the language of Euthalius the opening sentences of the Armenian historian, Lazarus of Pharbi.

1 e.g. (Z. 405)

Euthalius. Lazarus of Pharbi. Prd. in Epp. Paul. History of Ai·menia. To cp,>.o/,laO,r rral 0'1l'OV8ai'ov dya]LEVOS' Written at the request or Vahan, Tijr 07/S' aya7f'1/S, ITanp Tl/,lu.lmn, alllo'i general and marzban of Armeuia. Tf' .e:al ff'E,6o'i E1Kc.>v, CTT£V@'IT,i Ttvi ,cal (Translation of Victor Langlois.) 1TaprnT8vun Tijr luToplar €JLUVTVV £'1TU­ Le present ouvrage, ceuvre de cpij,m, TOI/a£ TOI! '!Tpo>.oyov TOV Ilav>.ov notre faiblesse, va former comme la 'ITPU'Y/J-UTftas uvyypafa,. rral '!To>.v p.ii­ troisi~me partie de ces annales. Nous (011 ~ ,c.a0' ~f'US lpyov dvfaftal-''I" aln sommes force d' [ entreprendre] un Tijr 1Taparroijr • ly11w11 yap iv 11'apo1µ.la1r sembable travail par ordre des princes T;, ~aAaVµEvov, OT, aT} viOs- civ'],coos Eu et sur les exhortations des saints &1ra>~El9 Err-rat, 0 ae t}7r~,coor lrrra, docteurs, n'osant pas nous opposer, Tm;T'lr lrrTor (cf, Prov. 13. 1). en nous rappelant les menaces que la saint Ecriture fait au.x enfants desobeissants et de l'indulgence [qu'elle] montre vis-a-vis de ceu.x qur sont soumis et dociles.

Here the same idea is seen to underlie both authors, viz. the fear of disobedience to superiors, based on the warning of the Scriptures against disobedient children. The passage which Eu­ thalius quotes from the Proverbs underlies the prologue of Lazarus. Each writer suggests by antithesis, in the manner of the Proverbs, the well-being which is the portion of the obedient. Each of them speaks modestly of his own powers, Laz:,i.rus calling the task one that is 'the work of his weakness,' and Euthalius 'a work that is too great for me.' Euthalius further- describes his work by saying that he has rushed into 'the narrows and straits of history' in writing the present prologue to St Paul. Surely the natural suggestion is that both writers are using conventional openings, and Euthalius' language suggests further that he has borrowed from the prologue to a history. Lazarus wrote bis History not earlier than A.D. 485 as a sequel to the works of Agathangelus and Faustus of Byzantium. Eutha­ lius cannot have imitated him, both by reason of the date, as well as because the work is written in Armenian. Will it be said that Lazarus has imitated the Euthalian prologue? this is extremely unlikely, for Lazarus was well acquainted with Greek literature and was hardly likely to select for a model of style so trifling a piece as Euthalius' prologue. Moreover when we take into account the proved borrowing of Euthalius from Eusebius and the E.:U'l'HALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 71 suspicious statement about the 'narrows and straits of his'tory' we are led to infer that both writers are drawing upon some clas13ic opening in which the work of a historical writer is compared to the course of a ship navigated in difficult and narrow seas. And this supposition is not an unnatural one. It will be found to be the main idea of the prologue to the history of Aga­ thangelus, who tells us (Langlois, p. 106) "Pour nous, ce n'est pas une orgueilleuse resolution qui nous pousse a entreprendre teme­ rairement ce travail; mais nous sommes contraint malgre nous, par les ordres formels des princes, a naviguer sur la mer des lettres." And a reference of the prologue of Euthalius to the Catholic Epistles shews the same comparison of the literary artist to the tempest-tossed voyager in a tiny skiff. We say, then, that the evidence favours a belief that Euthalius found a literary model for his prologue to the Pauline Epistles in the proem of some well-known historical work; and from the suspicious use of a quotation from the Proverbs we suspect that it was the work of a Christian historian. And certainly we do not think any one will have anything further to say in defence of the originality of Euthalius or in praise of his copious vocabulary. Having now proved the dependence of Euthalius upon Euse­ bius and others we are in a better position to determine the text of Euthalius in doubtful cases and the interpretation where the meaning is obscure. For example, in a passage quoted above (Z. 532) the printed text of Euthalius reads «v€tA€V µ,ev 'A,ypi7r-rrivav 7rpooTa .,.~v lota11 fL'l'/T€pa where Cod. Vat. 7 61 has 'l"~V eavrov fL1JTEpa. A reference to the Eusebian text shews that this latter reading is probably correct. On the same page Euthalius has avvfJ}.,0e oe 7ra'A.iv o Aov,di~ avrp, but Cod. Vat. 761 and Cod. Boeclerianus read uvvfJv. A reference to the text of Eusebius shews that he constantly, and in this very co~nection reads avv~v. Conversely, where the text of Eusebius is doubtful, we have reason to believe that the Euthalian extracts furnish fresh material for its elucidation. Coming now to the question of interpretation, we have a right to assume as a general principle that when Euthalius uses Eusebian language he uses it in the Eusebian sense; he may sometimes misunderstand, but even a stupid transcriber will, in the majority of cases, take the words in their proper sense. Let 72 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. us then turn to the disputed passage in which I claim to have detected a deletion of the unorthodox name Meletius and the insertion of the orthodox Athanasius, and in which Mr Robinson thinks no case has been made out for any tampering with the text. The principal sentences which need interpretation are as follows: (Z. 406) €"fW 0€ OtKatmTaTa, Kal µaXa "f€ op0oor;;, UVVTporf,ov T€ ' ,I.."\ \ > ,I.. , , tf '\ '- 'I! ' , / Kat, 't'l"'7JII, ..,_e1n.,.,1JP,UTatµ , ,av qot," eKa£ , «aTa"'esoo"' , ...T'IJV ..,_"' ev'TT'potr'l}"fOpov, , ..,_, ..,_ T7JV 'TT'aVV 'f'epwvvµov, T1JV TWV €£WV l\,O"fLWV €/-"'f'[l\,Q(J'O't'OV .,.,,,,µ, "' , '..,_, ., \ ,I,."' , \ ,, , " "' , Jl,€"'€T1JV, V'f' '1]V "f€"fWVW<;, 't'l"'OXplUT€, Kai €tUW"f€ TO£ TWV otKTVWV avTijr;; {nrapxwv, Kal T~V €pctqµiov avTijr;; '1T'pou177optav €"fKaTa- wpll"fP,aTevoµevor;; ' quxvair;;... T€ aei, \ Kat' a«oiµ71Totr;;, , 7vµvauiatr;;' d«ovoµevor;; (I. aq«ovµevor;;) ev0aX€ TOl)TOV T6 Ka"'A.ovp,€VOV €V 611/8ato, cpepoovvµ,oo~ ofi ,Y€VVllTat ITopcpupfrou "'A.£0ou µ,fra"'A.Xov 71"A.€LUT1JV (}

, .,\ , I~ .,/.. I , \ l'lo I 1 µ,ovt/CO<; n, oov Ka£ µ,avtooo17,;;; .•. -rv.,.,ouµ,€vo, €71"1 TTJ µ,aviq, . But perhaps most striking of all is the way in which he plays with the name of Meletius the bishop of the churches in Pontus (H. E. vii. 32): o 0€ MeXfrw~ (T6 µ,eXt Tij~ 'ATn,cq~ €/CaA.OVV av-rov 1 Similarly Titus Bostrensis adv. Manichaeos, Pro!.: o lie Ma•r~s be {Jap{J&.pwv Kai T-ijs µa.vlas atiT1]s hrWvvµos. '74 EUTHALlUS AND EUSEBIUS.

0£t a1ro11 , "ITatoEta,;-t-, I ) T0t0VT0'i", _., TJV'9- 0t0V1' av

• With which previous explanation of mine, I see Mr Robinson agrees. F.!UTHALIUS AND EUSEBIUS. 75 his purpose just as well to call Melete 'Yap Tpo"IT'O'> Kal. Toi!Jvoµ,a. If Gregory of N azianzus played with the name of his Meletius, there was certainly nothing against the supposition that Euthalius might have treated one of his friends in a similar manner. But surely the case is immensely strengthened when we find amongst the names upon which Eusebius plays the very name of Meletius; for we have shewn conclusively that Euthalius appro­ priates the ideas and language of Eusebius freely, and that he imitates him in playing upon the name of Stephen. Why then should there be any difficulty in the supposition that Euthalius has also borrowed from Eusebius the idea of playing upon the name of Meletius ? And is not this hypothesis further strengthened

1 I refuse to credit Eusebius with 2:avXos /Jn iCT&.-,,e11ep or with IfaDX01 6n 1r'1rct11Tct1, 76 EUTHALlUS AND EUSEBIUS. by the fact that in the very same sentence, as Mr Robinson admits, Euthalius plays upon his own name? I consider, then, that my case, so far from having been rendered hopeless, or reduced to an unnecessary piece of ingenuity in the face of Prof. Robinson's investigations, is in reality very much stronger than I 1 had at first imagined it to be • A further test of the accuracy of the solution will lie in the fact that it helps us to clear up some of the remaining obscurities in the text of Euthalius. For instance in the opening sentences of the prologue to the Acts, we are told of students of the Scripture in quest of immortality, who seek to realize the blessing of the first Psalm, TOV, 7i€pl TOU 0efov )..oryov AD,YOV, €/J,/J,€AET'TJP,a llVICT(J)P u 1'al µ,e0' i]µ,epav, Tfi ucf,wv avTWll TE0eil!Ta£ yvxfj, <1,A'f/0/;,, TO TI]', ary)..aop.al0>11 p.EVO~, C::s c/>11aw aVTOs, Tcji rWu lepovl­ lµapTvp1]0"£11 avro (), ITaiiAos O cl1ro­ ""'" Xp10"'TOV p.apropwv o-ncJ>avq, ICOTE- O"'TOAos, glq,n Tqv ucpaAqv cl1ro­ 1(00-p.~BrJ. 'Poop.atol a. 7r,p11<.aAAEO"III Tp.1J (), fr, iv T'l' Tpia1torrTT1Jplov ,rJ8avs-, T0v ,ca()flpgavTEs ,1r,nw11 mhp l-'111//l'IS Ka A;, V dyrova cl'YO>IIIO"OP,EVO r Ell 'P<»p.'fl, ~p.lpav 1rav11yvpl(ovo-1 Ty 1rpo Tpl@ II ,rip.1rTTJ f/µ•p~ Ilav{p.ov p.11vos ~nf Ka Aa 11/'ioo V 'I ov>.lru II 1rE /£1rTTJ IIaPE­ >.iyo,rn &,, 1rapa 'P0>p.alo1r ~ 1rpo p.ov l-'1/110 s TOVTOV TO µapTvpwv fopni­ TpH;,11 ,caAavl'iruv 'lovAlruv, ,ea()' qv (ov'TES, ET£A£16Jl:J1J Oli1tor tl1rOOT0Xor Tff} KaT' z. 532. "Ev8a l'iq o-vv•fJ'} TOIi IIav­ aVTOv µ,apTvpl­ tTfl Tijs rnii o-wTijpor f/p.@11 '!110-oii Xp,rr- ~ ' T1jplov 1ra8ovs Tp10-,ca11'iuC1Trp a. N•• Tov 1rapovo-ias . pruvos p.apTvpijo-ai,glcpu Tqv ucpaAqv .. EaT,v oiv.O 1rrov avToKpan,pruv ,car' atlT6 v f-apTvplc,, .ov cl1roO"'TMOV, O)fTQfT()a, TOV "'IPV'fP.UTOf IIavAov, EK T@II XPOVIKMII KUl/6110)11 Evo-EfJlov TOV IlaµcJ>lAov "1" avaK£tpaXal0>rr111 frOIOV· P,fJIOS, We have printed this passage with the spaced type by which 78 ~UTHALlUS AND EUSEBIUS. Prof. Robinson indicates the coincidence between the two sets of statements. His first remark upon these coincidences is that the comparison 'disposes of Zacagni's view that it is the work of the early Father from whom Euthalins borrowed his chapter-divisions, for it is redolent of Euthalius: the only question is whether it is not too redolent.' It will be recognized at once that this question of redolence has been somewhat complicated by the proved dependence of Euthalius upon Eusebius. The prologue itself has 'an ancient and fish-like smell.' Almost every word of it is from Eusebius, as we will shew in detail. And consequently when Mr Robinson makes his first general criticism of the Martyrium by saying that' it is almost inconceivable that a writer who has so great a wealth of expression as the author of the Prologue should repeat his own language in this slavish manner,' we may very well reply that the objection disappears as soon as it is found that the wealth of language is an illusion, and that the repetition is a repetition of the words of some other person. There is no law of criticism which expresses in the language of minute probability the chance that a person who has made a patchwork out of some other person's writings will repeat the offence or which affirms the extreme unlikeliness that he will put the stolen pieces together a little differently. We come now to three detailed objections which Mr Robinson makes to the authenticity of the Martyrium, which would be fatal if they were all correctly taken, without the possibility of reply: we will take them in order: they are intended to demonstrate that the Martyri'um is a later document, produced by an epitomiser working on the former. I. At first the author of the Martyrium embodies from the Prologue the Roman date for June 29, viz. tJ -rrpo Tptwv ,ca)\avowv 'lov)..lrov; but later on he gives the date as µ11vo,; 'Iovvlov el,caurfi €VV

2. It is objected that the phrase in the Martyrium T

1 The Eusebian usage may be seen from scores of passages; there are three in the beginning of H. E. iii. 5 rpoi TWP o.vrMh rTrpo.rorlowv avo.-yap,uOels .•• -rov TOV alrro/Jt rijs i-irei which occurs both in the Prologue and in the Martyrium. We have already shewn that Euthalius had pilfered from this passage. Coming now to the disputed passage ev y Kat Te).ewuTat Trj> KaT' aUTov µapTvpl

~..o,,Uuµ,to, €7TI 'Pr,)µ'11,; &rye-rat. 'Apiu-r­ apxo, o' avTtp uvv~v, &v Kat elKo'Tro, uvvaixµ,a).roTOV 'TT'Ol/ TWV €7T'tUTOAOOV a'TT'OKa).e'i. Kat Aot11'a<; 0€ o Tit, 7rpaEet, ,_ ' 1.._ ,I.." <:, I ' r ,.._ \ TOJV ll'!T'OUTOl\,(J)V rypa'f'v wapaoov<;, ev TOVT0l1- 1'U'T€r.l/(1"€ 'T"7V tuTOplav, OteTiav c$'>,,,17v €7T), T~, 'Pwµ.17, TOV Ilav).ov Jve'TOV OtaT p i"lrat Ka), TOV TOV 0 eov >.oryov aKCdA.IJT(J)1- ""lP vEat E'TT'l..ory17utiµ,evov [Euthal. add. TDV Ilaii).ov] av8t, €7T't T~V TOV "'flPVryµaT01- OtaKovfov ).6ryo, ex.et ..et, T

I suppose we must explain "ar' avrdv here by reference to "a0' 8v at the beginning of the chapter 1, but the harshness of the construction is as great in Eusebius as in the Martyrium, and no argument for a later date of the Martyrium can be deduced from the expression in question. Mr Robinson's second objection, there­ fore, falls to the ground. 'l'he strongest objection is, no doubt, the third, which is based upon an apparent confusion between the Martyrdom and the Depositio of the Apostles which, according to Robinson, exists in the Martyrium but not in the Prologue. Did Eusebius say any­ thing about the Depositio, and did he say it clearly ? We have by this time little reason to confide in Euthalius as an independent investigator: and the prejudice is in favour of the use of Eusebian matter. It is very unfortunate that just at this point we lack the reference which would decisively clear the matter up, for Eusebius' book of Martyrs to which he seveml times refers in his history is not extant. No doubt it co11tained the Martyrdom of the ·great Apostles as well as of later worthies. We may, however, get some light upon the matter by referring to H. E. iii. 31, where Eusebius records the death of John and Philip and says IIav)\.ov µ,ev ovv ICal IIfrpov T7Jr:; T€MVT~r:; ;; T€ xpovor:; ,cat O TP07r0r:; ,cat 7rpoufri O T~r:; P,€Ta T?]V a11raAAa"J~V TOV f)lov T

1 It is Euaebius' way of describing coincidence in chronological position : vide Cbronicon passim. H. H. 6 82 EUTHALIUS AND EUSEBIU8. in the Prologue and the Martyrium. This would seem to meet Mr Robinson's third objection. And now as to the method of dating the Martyrdom or Depositio. In the first place, while we have reason to regard Eusebius as the proximate source for both the Prologue and the Martyrium, the actual date given, the 5th of Panemus, is older than Eusebius. We can see this by comparing Eusebius' method of dating Martyrdoms in the account of the Palestine Martyrs. For example, we have Sav0uco<; µi]v 8,; )\.eryoiT' &v 'A7rp/;>.,)l.,o<; ,rapti 'Proµa[w;. il.eo-lov µ'1/vO<; efJooµr,, ,rpo €7T"Td elBwv 'Iouv[rov AE,YOLT' av ,rapa 'Proµaloi<; l and so on, from which it is clear that the months used by Eusebius, writing at Cesarea, are the Roman months with Syro-Ma.cedonian names ; the Syro-Macedonian calendar has, therefore, been displaced. It is not unreasonable to suppose, then, that a reference to Panemus in the account of Paul's Martyrdom, where Panemus is clearly the Syro-Macedonian month and not the later Roman substitute, belongs to an earlier time than Eusebius. If he found it in his sources, he was almost bound to explain it. The document from which our information comes must have contained more than the allusion to the fifth day of Panemus. But even with the attached Roman date there is still some ambiguity; for Panemus itself has become ambiguous: and we may regard it as certain that the calendar which in Eusebius' time had been changed from Syro-Macedonian arrange­ ment to Roman arrangement, while retaining the names, would in the end take up the Roman names as well as the Roman arrange­ ment of the months: and these names amongst a Greek-speaking people will appear as Greek names. It is therefore quite natural that we should find in the Martyrium in the passage in which the writer brings the dates down to his day, the statement that the Martyrdom is commemorated on the 25th of June. I do not see, then, that any convincing reason has been brought forward for making the Martyrium later than the Pauline Pro­ logue, or assigning them to different hands. Euthalius is proved to have been an epitomizer of previous materials; why should we assume a second epitomizer to go over what Euthalius has collected; he was quite capable of doing the summarizing himself, either by

1 That is the 7th of Desius is the 7th of June, and so constantly. Notice the agreement of the Eusebian method of dating with the language of the Martyrium: ¾/T

PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS